2 ms·
For context, I've been in mobile for 10 years and in general it's the opposite - frameworks are rigid, but the layer under it shifts a lot. These frameworks ten
by muzani 2y ago
For context, I've been in mobile for 10 years and in general it's the opposite - frameworks are rigid, but the layer under it shifts a lot. These frameworks tend to collapse in an earthquake like manner after multiple updates. We usually support iOS up to 2-3 years old, that's how bad it is.
The other approach is to build it on a platform that shifts with the changes, i.e. hybrid and web. But if you crack open the source of Cordova, you find all kinds of tangled, unmaintained, bad practice wiring and rewiring. I spent a few months trying to hack Cordova plugins and we decided to just scrap the entire code and build native; fully rewriting the app into a custom framework took 3 months.
However, it sounds like tools like Rails are built on a very sturdy platform that doesn't introduce breaking changes every year? That's an angle I haven't considered.
- conductr 2y agoUnlike mobile, you have control over the underlying OS and full stack. So usually you aren’t forced to keep pace with your frameworks changes even if they were breaking. So long as you watch and patch security issues you’re fine, it will work forever. But you’ll occasionally likely feel a desire to upgrade things, I find it’s usually out of Want versus Need because it’s already so mature you have time to watch big new versions mature a bit before you roll to it. You might skip a major version or two because of this. Even since very early on I think I had a v1.x app that I continued hacking and building on until eventually moving to v4.x which was maybe 10 years later