Redundancy vs dependencies: which is worse?
mercredi 17 juin 2015 à 16:49Arthur Hoaro's Links 17/06/2015
Article intéressant (de 2008) mettant en perspective la redondance de code et l'usage de dépendances ("modules") à tout va.
Comme toujours, rien n'est tout blanc ou tout noir.
La conclusion de l'article
"Redundancy sucks. Redundancy always means duplicated efforts, and sometimes interoperability problems. But dependencies are worse. The only reasonable thing to depend on is a full-fledged, real module, not an amorphous bunch of code. You can usually look at a problem and guess quite well if its solution has good chances to become a real module, with a real owner, with a stable interface making all its users happy enough. If these chances are low, pick redundancy. And estimate those chances conservatively, too. Redundancy is bad, but dependencies can actually paralyze you. I say – kill dependencies first."
(Permalink)
Article intéressant (de 2008) mettant en perspective la redondance de code et l'usage de dépendances ("modules") à tout va.
Comme toujours, rien n'est tout blanc ou tout noir.
La conclusion de l'article
"Redundancy sucks. Redundancy always means duplicated efforts, and sometimes interoperability problems. But dependencies are worse. The only reasonable thing to depend on is a full-fledged, real module, not an amorphous bunch of code. You can usually look at a problem and guess quite well if its solution has good chances to become a real module, with a real owner, with a stable interface making all its users happy enough. If these chances are low, pick redundancy. And estimate those chances conservatively, too. Redundancy is bad, but dependencies can actually paralyze you. I say – kill dependencies first."
(Permalink)