Programming

27863 readers

311 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

snowe@programming.dev

Ategon@programming.dev

UlrikHD@programming.dev

bugsmith@programming.dev

Spyro@programming.dev

Is Clean Architecture actually good? What's your experience? (programming.dev)

submitted 4 days ago by somegeek@programming.dev to c/programming@programming.dev

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/54023908

Hi!

I've never read any of Uncle Bob's books. But I have taken interest in "Clean Architecture" as it seems like a good solution to make mid to large sized projects simple to understand and maintain.

I think MVC gets too much coupling and fails at larger projects, same with n-tier. But I'm not sure about anything right now (software design is a very complicated problem after all).

So I was wondering if you friends who have used Clean Architecture in production can share your knowledge and experience with me about this design?

Is it actually good and worth investing in?

Footnote:

I'm especially weighing this architecture because Uncle Bob's writings are really hit and miss. I don't see him as a master or guru so I take everything he says with a grain of salt.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Peereboominc@piefed.social 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I used to like clean architecture. I implemented it in some large monolith applications but later on changed it. What stayed is the seperation of things by giving a dependency to a module/struct/class/object (via a constructor). The object does not need to know what has been passed to it, only that it can for example store something. The storing of something can be saving it to an SQL database, to a file, print it to console, etc. So basically inversion of control. And the basic breakup between the domain logic/business logic and the things that does the heavy lifting like a database handler, API handlers, etc.

[–] melfie@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Agreed, DI in moderation can be useful. I generally like to target dependencies with I/O so they can be substituted with test doubles to allow the domain logic to be tested with fast, deterministic tests. On the other hand, I’ve seen codebases that go way overboard with SOLID and create unmaintainable messes that are difficult to reason about.

[–] Peereboominc@piefed.social 3 points 3 days ago

Yeah, that's always the thing. Sometimes it is good to have a strict guideline/structure to prevent a mess but that itself can be the source if the mess. As it n way to complicated with many unnecessary abstraction layers while a simple direct call to a function would also be good enough.