3 ms·

I see where you're going. You never know when MAGIC will be needed and whether or not it will remain constant. It also doesn't scale horizontally. The right

I see where you're going. You never know when MAGIC will be needed and whether or not it will remain constant. It also doesn't scale horizontally. The right answer if you want to be fully robust is to make a Magic microservice that will return the magic number when needed and autoscale on demand. You could have the swagger doc for the service include the explanation.

TuringTest 4y ago
You're joking, but your description of a prepare-for-any-circumstance mentality summarizes exactly the problem, you never know if MAGIC will be needed or not remain constant, so assuming it will not and making your program structure more complex for it is overengineering. The best approach if you want to be future-proof while would be to label the instance in-place, so that you can look later for places where #MAGIC is being used, without losing locality: foo(67); // #MAGIC explanation
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]