On Tuesday, November 1, 2016 at 1:16:40 PM UTC, Kasey Speakman wrote: > > It is silly, and I don't know why it was done this way. But that's the > world I live in now. It's easy to justify one case at a time, but all > tolled it adds up. > > As far as "layers", you should check out these two posts in order. > > > http://blog.ploeh.dk/2013/12/03/layers-onions-ports-adapters-its-all-the-same/ > > http://blog.ploeh.dk/2016/03/18/functional-architecture-is-ports-and-adapters/ >
I think people who write code like this must get paid by the line. A couple of years ago I worked some overtime over Christmass/New Year to refactor a system like this that was getting out of control. In 5 days I turned 10,000 lines of code with layers into 1,000 lines of code with just 1 layer that did exactly the same thing - then booked myself a cheap holiday in early January to enjoy my TOIL. I'm not saying its always the right answer, but when someone tells you that you must have lots of layers, I would always question them and their motives. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elm-discuss+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
