3 ms·

It's interesting that the article's thesis is almost entirely about about PowerFX, but the 140 comments here so far don't even mention it.

hudgeon 5y ago
Thanks. As the article's author (and first time writing something that hits HN) it's been interesting seeing which parts of the article have struck a nerve and which parts have gone through to the keeper.
- mgummelt 5y ago
  :) While I have you here, I have to say I still don't understand the connection you're making between PowerFX and compatibility with existing deployment systems. I understand that a low-code platform that spits out an app in some sort of standard format, like source code or a docker image, would facilitate that integration, but where does PowerFX come in?
  - hudgeon 5y ago
    PowerFX is MS's name for the standard code format. I believe their ultimate goal is that: - business users build apps using a graphical low-code interface, - these then convert to PowerFX source code that goes into the enterprise's source control system. - The enterprise IT team tests the code, re-writes key components and deploys. - And these changes are then reflected back into the low-code app development environment. This allows business users to contribute domain expertise and IT to maintain their quality and governance role. Needless to say, this is non-trivial from a tech perspective but, in my view, is a better approach than an enterprise having a separate deployment and governance framework for low-code/RPA apps than for their other custom applications developed in Java/C++ etc.
    - mgummelt 5y ago
      Where are you seeing that it's a standard code format? I've skimmed this: https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/what-is-microsoft-power-fx/ https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/what-is-microsoft... and it seems that it's just a simple expression language, not a standard format that an entire PowerApps app would compile down to.
      - hudgeon 5y ago
        Hmmm. Good question. I was using standard format to mean two things: 1. Common code format across the Power platform, and 2. the branding MS was using to describe everything that would be put under source control. I have some doubts about whether the second point is true. This article (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/power-fx/overview https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/power-fx/ove...) discuss PowerFX stored as YAML files under source control. And this article which predates the PowerFX announcement (https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/source-code-files-for-canvas-apps/ https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/source-code-files...) discusses UI YAML files under source control. But nowhere does it say that they are branding the UI YAML files under the PowerFX moniker.
        mgummelt 5y ago
        Even then, if the YAML files can only be interpreted by Power Apps, then they can't be portably deployed.

hudgeon 5y ago

Thanks. As the article's author (and first time writing something that hits HN) it's been interesting seeing which parts of the article have struck a nerve and which parts have gone through to the keeper.

mgummelt 5y ago
:) While I have you here, I have to say I still don't understand the connection you're making between PowerFX and compatibility with existing deployment systems. I understand that a low-code platform that spits out an app in some sort of standard format, like source code or a docker image, would facilitate that integration, but where does PowerFX come in?
- hudgeon 5y ago
  PowerFX is MS's name for the standard code format. I believe their ultimate goal is that: - business users build apps using a graphical low-code interface, - these then convert to PowerFX source code that goes into the enterprise's source control system. - The enterprise IT team tests the code, re-writes key components and deploys. - And these changes are then reflected back into the low-code app development environment. This allows business users to contribute domain expertise and IT to maintain their quality and governance role. Needless to say, this is non-trivial from a tech perspective but, in my view, is a better approach than an enterprise having a separate deployment and governance framework for low-code/RPA apps than for their other custom applications developed in Java/C++ etc.
  - mgummelt 5y ago
    Where are you seeing that it's a standard code format? I've skimmed this: https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/what-is-microsoft-power-fx/ https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/what-is-microsoft... and it seems that it's just a simple expression language, not a standard format that an entire PowerApps app would compile down to.
    - hudgeon 5y ago
      Hmmm. Good question. I was using standard format to mean two things: 1. Common code format across the Power platform, and 2. the branding MS was using to describe everything that would be put under source control. I have some doubts about whether the second point is true. This article (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/power-fx/overview https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/power-platform/power-fx/ove...) discuss PowerFX stored as YAML files under source control. And this article which predates the PowerFX announcement (https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/source-code-files-for-canvas-apps/ https://powerapps.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/source-code-files...) discusses UI YAML files under source control. But nowhere does it say that they are branding the UI YAML files under the PowerFX moniker.
      - mgummelt 5y ago
        Even then, if the YAML files can only be interpreted by Power Apps, then they can't be portably deployed.