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

> Calling a constructor is DI. ‘new’ is the only DI framework required.

This feels like the sane thing to do, but sadly for historical reasons this won't work with many (if not the most) Java frameworks out there, or even certain options in the .NET ecosystem.

When you get non-trivial frameworks that are deeply entrenched in having DI and using it internally for a bunch of stuff, you'll find yourself out of options, e.g. if you use Spring/Spring Boot.

And in many places something like Spring Boot might be considered an "industry standard" and you might get looked at funny if you suggested using another framework, even more so if they have their own configuration/plugin/utility solutions for it already built within the org.

Personally, however, I rather enjoy alternative takes on how web frameworks could look and even something like Dropwizard/Vert.X/Quarkus have nice quality of life aspects to them.

In a sense, it's nice that the industry is moving towards smaller service based architectures, where you might spin up a new service with whatever tech fits the problem that you're trying to solve, as opposed to being locked into adding code on top of some bloated monolith (though that comes with certain tradeoffs and drawbacks, in regards to complexity and maintenance).




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

Search: