3 ms·
> we are in a place where most development projects are really "stitching" dependencies together Is there anything wrong with that, though? If there's any comm
by ATsch 6y ago
> we are in a place where most development projects are really "stitching" dependencies together
Is there anything wrong with that, though? If there's any common thread in the history of computing, it's that progress happens when things become abstracted enough to allow for another layer of building blocks. That's not to say that those layers don't have a cost, or we don't need to learn how to do them well, but gluing together components is really all software development has ever been.
- ChrisMarshallNY 6y agoIt's both good and bad; depending on how much care is taken in selecting dependencies. It's hard to use a lot of dependencies, regardless of their quality, without introducing bloat. Lots of redundancies. For example, each dependency may have its own messaging or thread management system, or its own memory management system. Or it may include other dependencies that have their own "special sauce." For myself, I use lots of little packages; mostly written by Yours Troolie, and only occasionally use third-party dependencies. Each of my packages is usually crafted towards a certain discrete function, and has its own project lifecycle. I think that's a good thing about using dependencies. I believe that modules with encapsulated lifecycles are a good way to ensure quality (or not, if I "choose poorly," as the Knight Templar said in the Indiana Jones movie).