4 ms·
I have a feeling that a lot of commenters mix up structure design with structure implementation. Rule talks about the design (and I find approach interesting)
by xlii 4y ago
I have a feeling that a lot of commenters mix up structure design with structure implementation.
Rule talks about the design (and I find approach interesting) yet implementation can (and most likely should) be limited.
E.g. we are designing a world. In this design we say children can have toys. It doesn’t make sense to design universe so that children are limited to 5 toys or any other arbitrary number. But no room can fit infinite number of toys so implementation is limited. For some it’s 500 toys but for some it’s 500.000 toys.
Names or parents are good real world examples. Sure, most people have 2 parents pr at most 2 names but this rule argues that if there’s more than one it shouldn’t be limited at all (which also makes sense in real life even though IT system might limit names to 256 characters because hardware).
- eternalban 4y agoThen change the name of the rule :) Zero, One, or Many. I think that would satisfy all concerned.
- xlii 4y agoAbsolutely agree. However that’s for the rule creator. I think that infinity in this context sounds slightly poetic.