4 ms·

Agreed. Although, sometimes it feels like this is a losing battle. I've worked with too many people who see that level of separation as "unneeded duplication",

Agreed. Although, sometimes it feels like this is a losing battle. I've worked with too many people who see that level of separation as "unneeded duplication", with constant complaints about having to update a bunch of different layers "just to add a new field. IMO, at a minimum, you have your API layer model, your internal model, and your database model with a mapping layer at each boundary. I rarely have problems when I structure it that way, but when working on applications that pass the same model from their API down to their database, or vice-versa, it's always full of the same types of problems that comes with tight coupling.

senorrib 3y ago
This is exactly my experience. Glad to see I'm not alone, sad to hear that it's so common out there.
macrael 3y ago
I think there are certain types of boilerplate that used to be truly onerous that are now much less so because of types. If there are 3 different files that need to be updated to add a file, and forgetting one is only going to error at runtime (maybe even only if you're exercising that new field) that's horrible. But 3 files that require updating where the code won't compile until you've added all three is way way less of a problem.
- tlrobinson 3y ago
  > But 3 files that require updating where the code won't compile until you've added all three is way way less of a problem. I think this is only really possible in a relatively small subset of programming languages, even among those with static typing. At a minimum it seems like it would require a type system that didn't allow optional properties (by default) and did distinguish between nullable and non-nullable types. Unless I'm missing something. Would love to see some examples of this done right. Or at least examples of languages you've done this in.
  - macrael 3y ago
    Optional types can get you for sure. I've been doing this with typescript and it's been alright. Prisma -> my domain model -> ApolloServer

senorrib 3y ago

This is exactly my experience. Glad to see I'm not alone, sad to hear that it's so common out there.

macrael 3y ago

I think there are certain types of boilerplate that used to be truly onerous that are now much less so because of types. If there are 3 different files that need to be updated to add a file, and forgetting one is only going to error at runtime (maybe even only if you're exercising that new field) that's horrible. But 3 files that require updating where the code won't compile until you've added all three is way way less of a problem.

tlrobinson 3y ago
> But 3 files that require updating where the code won't compile until you've added all three is way way less of a problem. I think this is only really possible in a relatively small subset of programming languages, even among those with static typing. At a minimum it seems like it would require a type system that didn't allow optional properties (by default) and did distinguish between nullable and non-nullable types. Unless I'm missing something. Would love to see some examples of this done right. Or at least examples of languages you've done this in.
- macrael 3y ago
  Optional types can get you for sure. I've been doing this with typescript and it's been alright. Prisma -> my domain model -> ApolloServer