On Sat, 2005-04-23 at 16:44 +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Oliver Jones <oliver(a)deeper.co.nz> [2005-04-23
Sometimes over-engineered frameworks can be very
providing a consistent and well tested set of foundations upon
which to build.
I disagree completely. I probably agree with the intent of what
you’re saying, but I can’t let this statement stand as is.
Architecture astronautics lead to a lot of entropy for not much
gain. Frameworks are helpful when they try to address a problem,
not when they try to make you build your application around them.
I agree. Except when the framework is intended to be something that you
build around. Something that saves you from having to write all the
"boring stuff" and focus purely on the problem domain. Ruby on Rails
sounds like that (though I've not used it) and I read about a perl
framework recently (I forget the name) that lets you build webapps with
very few lines of code.
There is only one problem with a lot of these sorts of frameworks, and
that is if you want to do something that doesn't fit with the
architecture or methodology used in the framework things can start to
look like a hack. Which is why these sorts of frameworks need to be
carefully considered in the context of what you're trying to achieve.
Oliver Jones » Roving Code Warrior
oliver(a)deeperdesign.com » +64 (21) 41 2238 » www.deeperdesign.com