Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is just "loose coupling" expressed with different terminology.

It's not wrong but it's also nothing new - it's about as novel as object oriented programming or DRY.



I don't think it's loose coupling but more: don't build shitty overcomplicated interfaces for simple things.

What it doesn't go into is the fact you don't know if it's a shitty overcomplicated interface or not for about a decade at least, until everyone has built their universe on top of it.

What we have in the article is survivor bias. Things that are exemplars rather than the status quo and that's a good thing. But even considering what it explains, we will still blow our toes off 9 out of 10 times.


>shitty overcomplicated interfaces for simple things.

This is tight coupling.


No tight coupling is a strong immutable dependency. That doesn't necessarily mean complexity. It could mean a leaky abstraction around a simple API, like half of POSIX etc.

What does screw you is things that are hard to reason about and you don't know if you can reason about them until many years have passed or you've tried to replace either side of the abstraction.


Shitty overcomplicated interfaces are directly caused by leaking abstractions.

This is tight coupling.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: