3 ms·

How else are you going to get global atomic, possibly highly-available share nothing mutable state? Magic? GenServers aren't difficult. Use the patterns rather

How else are you going to get global atomic, possibly highly-available share nothing mutable state? Magic? GenServers aren't difficult. Use the patterns rather than wincing or complaining about the lack of nonexistent wishes if you're not going to build a simpler solution. Business rules are often represented as an ordering of constraints and triggers in models when using DDD & MVC. One example in another language would be trailblazer.[0] Mud is when gobs of fragile, low-level of code is slapped together just to solve today's problem where everything is a special case without testability, architecture, standardization, or concern for maintenance or extensibility. See also: [1] 0. https://github.com/trailblazer/trailblazer https://github.com/trailblazer/trailblazer 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_rules_engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_rules_engine

ashton314 2y ago
> GenServers aren't difficult. You're right. GenServers are wonderful and simple. I'm just saying this problem doesn't need them. > Use the patterns… I am. Monads are just another pattern. You know the `with {:ok, ...} <- ... else ... end` pattern in Elixir? That's another monad! I show one concrete example here in my post that monads cover well. I've come across other scenarios in industry where monads can cut down on boilerplate better than anything else. Would another solution work? Sure—it's a Turing-complete language. Would it be as clean? Sometimes not. > Business rules, mud I don't need definitions—I understand those concepts just fine. I'm just trying to understand why you think it's relevant to my post. What's the specific "mud" here?
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
  > That's another monad! If you like monads, maybe you should look into Haskell or Idris. Please let me know when you write an interesting post that solves a class of problems rather than getting excited over something so trivial. Perhaps I'm jaded. Good luck to you.
mrkeen 2y ago
> How else are you going to get global atomic, possibly highly-available share nothing mutable state? This is a contradiction, unless I'm misunderstanding 'global', 'highly-available' and 'share-nothing'.

ashton314 2y ago

> GenServers aren't difficult. You're right. GenServers are wonderful and simple. I'm just saying this problem doesn't need them. > Use the patterns… I am. Monads are just another pattern. You know the `with {:ok, ...} <- ... else ... end` pattern in Elixir? That's another monad! I show one concrete example here in my post that monads cover well. I've come across other scenarios in industry where monads can cut down on boilerplate better than anything else. Would another solution work? Sure—it's a Turing-complete language. Would it be as clean? Sometimes not. > Business rules, mud I don't need definitions—I understand those concepts just fine. I'm just trying to understand why you think it's relevant to my post. What's the specific "mud" here?

hi-v-rocknroll 2y ago
> That's another monad! If you like monads, maybe you should look into Haskell or Idris. Please let me know when you write an interesting post that solves a class of problems rather than getting excited over something so trivial. Perhaps I'm jaded. Good luck to you.

mrkeen 2y ago

> How else are you going to get global atomic, possibly highly-available share nothing mutable state? This is a contradiction, unless I'm misunderstanding 'global', 'highly-available' and 'share-nothing'.