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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
