4 ms·
Evans re-invented many tried and proven concepts and gave them his own names which lead to much confusion. I prefer not to use his idiosyncratic terminology and
by ExpiredLink 12y ago
Evans re-invented many tried and proven concepts and gave them his own names which lead to much confusion. I prefer not to use his idiosyncratic terminology and stick with the established terms.
- Terr_ 12y agoAre there any equivalences you'd like to highlight, involving other tried/proven terms everybody is likely to have heard of?
- brudgers 12y agoWhat are the established terms you prefer?
- xdl 12y agoCan you expand upon this? I was recently introduced to DDD and had the same gut feeling, although am having trouble articulating exactly why. It does feel like a lot of what Evans is saying has already been said in design patterns books.
- ExpiredLink 12y agoE.g. Repository. It's clearly similar to other persistence designs. OTOH, it's somehow different from plain ORMs - and it has a different name. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/25648676/ddd-repository-unit-of-work-orms-and-dependency-injection http://stackoverflow.com/questions/25648676/ddd-repository-u...
- brudgers 12y agoThat doesn't feel strong enough to support the claim that Evans is repackaging established terms.
- ExpiredLink 12y agoDon't be so lazy. Take any of the DDD concepts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-driven_design http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-driven_design) and try to find the equivalent real-wold names.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- slantedview 12y agoAs far as I'm concerned, Evans, and Fowler (who he references in the DDD book), are the creators of the established terms. Feel free to demonstrate otherwise.