Add a comment

 

Re: Layers, hexagons, features and components

It's that distinction between published and public that's crucial but difficult to define in the language. We've ended up using conventions and coaching to distinguish the two.
As we use .net (for package read assembly) we experimented using "internals visible to " to provide cross package access for testing. But ended up going the cultural way to encourage dependency only on published interfaces even within a package. I'd be interested to see how one could really make this distinction within the language in a more effective way.
We are starting to see our granularity coarsen, with packages bound by deployment rather than by simply logical areas being more the norm. And in turn deployment too is becoming more coarse grained as we start to see less risk deploying whole services every time.
At the end of the day, a hacky coder is going to couple to your db schema behind your back anyway ;)

Re: Layers, hexagons, features and components


Title
Body
HTML : b, strong, i, em, blockquote, br, p, pre, a href="", ul, ol, li, sub, sup
Name
E-mail address
Website
Remember me Yes  No 

E-mail addresses are not publicly displayed, so please only leave your e-mail address if you would like to be notified when new comments are added to this blog entry (you can opt-out later).