Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Beginning CS students frequently don't see the point of object-oriented design, because intro-level class projects are by definition small, simple programs that can be readily comprehended by a single person and written from start to finish in a few hours. For such simple programs, the modest organizational gains from OO programming don't seem to justify the extra boilerplate and conceptual complexity.

The first time I started using Django, I was really confused and everything seemed incredibly bloated and complicated. Flask seemed much more attractive -- but as soon as I had a Flask project started to grow a moderate number of features, Django looked better and better. For simple projects, the modest gains from using Django's features don't seem to justify the extra boilerplate and conceptual complexity.

I know someone who insists that assembly language is where beginners should start.

The common thread: It's hard to start working at a high level of abstraction, because understanding the lower level of abstraction first is what gives you the grounding for appreciating exactly what the higher level abstraction does and why you want it to be done.

I think the author of this article is at a point in his web dev learning where working at a low level of abstraction is easier. When he gets to larger, more complicated projects, he'll probably end up writing his own half-baked home-rolled MVC, or having a project implode under the weight of its own spaghetti architecture. Then he'll start to see the advantages of using a framework.

Nothing negative is implied by going down this path -- it provides valuable learning experience and an intuition for what the internals of a good framework do without even using the framework (since you've experienced first-hand things that seem like they would be common pain points and how they're dealt with at the lower level, you'll (often correctly) suspect that standard higher-level tools might have ways to help people deal with those pain points.)




My assembly language for beginners: https://github.com/akkartik/mu. Rationale: http://akkartik.name/post/mu


But he could have used an existing template language. Seems like he only needs some templates with sub-templates and there are many solutions for that. Angular 1 with ui-router is for example great for mapping data into templates. Ember does it and so does many, many other systems.


This illustrates my point. You'd be introducing a second language and a large framework with lots of other unrelated stuff -- which is completely unnecessary when you have a language builtin which is perfectly adequate to the task.

Yes, yes, I know, separating data from code, filters, escape sanitization, there are a lot of good reasons to use templates. If you're a developer just starting out in web design who is creating a very simple project, string concatenation will let you get up and running without the extra complexity.

Of course when your project gets big enough, you'll start to try to modularize things, and then when someone spends 5 minutes explaining templates to the idea, you can immediately see why you want them, because at that point they'll actually reduce the complexity of your project.




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

Search: