Oh, I loathe the argumentative trick of just saying that folks weren't doing a technique correctly when the technique is observed to lead to very poor results. Almost as much as I've loathed every iDesign inspired codebase I've ever had the displeasure to work with - ThreadSky

jeremydmiller.bsky.social • 4 days ago

Oh, I loathe the argumentative trick of just saying that folks weren't doing a technique correctly when the technique is observed to lead to very poor results.

Almost as much as I've loathed every iDesign inspired codebase I've ever had the displeasure to work with

Comments

jeremydmiller.bsky.social•4 days ago

Too much ceremony, way too much chattiness, does a very poor job of separating concerns in my opinion, adds too much complexity for no real value compared to other possible approaches to organizing a codebase and distributing responsibilities

tridy.bsky.social•4 days ago

I've been to a couple of their courses. Making people feel like idiots(monkeys) isn't constructive. I am trying to take the mechanics from IDesign; volatilities are hard. What's better? I am overwhelmed with how many forms the ugly agile takes. Different name, the same re-re-re-refactoring.

jeremydmiller.bsky.social•4 days ago

I honestly think that almost every idea I've ever encountered for code organization and software architecture would be better than iDesign is in real practice on a longer lived system.

My preferred approach is to remove as much code ceremony as possible, and probably use CQRS + VSA

jeremydmiller.bsky.social•4 days ago

On non-trivial projects that aren't just CRUD systems anyway

tridy.bsky.social•4 days ago

I have seen an example of (I think)VSA with 100+ microservices. Choosing a certain architectural style might be a matter of preference, and IDesign is a silver bullet, since there are no silver bullets. It's possible to screw up any kind of architecture by wrong boundaries, slices or encapsulation.

tridy.bsky.social•4 days ago

I do see how we as humans were doing the work as managers+workers(engines)+resources through hundreds of years and are doing ok most of the time. I see the attempt of mimicking the same structure in IT as a good start. It's hard to work with with volatilities. What's easier then?

jeremydmiller.bsky.social•4 days ago

That just does not resonate with me in the slightest. And real world analogies to coding efforts haven't exactly been wildly successful in my experience either.

tridy.bsky.social•4 days ago

Services, child services, helpers, workers, repositories, most of the time there is some kind of the "layer" structure. Until we get services injected into repositories, or 50+ microservices. I do not know about your, but often it looks to me like people are not even trying.

jeremydmiller.bsky.social•4 days ago

I'd say the problem is the other way around and people are trying very hard, but adopting practices and ideas like iDesign or Clean Architecture templates that lead to quite a bit of layering and ceremony

tridy.bsky.social•4 days ago

Do you mean that it's an overkill, the wrong tool for the job, or too many unnecessary details in those? I think layering can be quite simple. What components live in these layers might become messy. Is it in the number of layers as well? More than 3? Less than 2? :)

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply