Why I hate frameworks (2005)

<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20180927070411&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;discuss.joelonsoftware.com&#x2F;default.asp?joel.3.219431" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20180927070411&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;discuss.joe...</a>

This article really clarified it for me when I first read it (along with another I can&#x27;t find, about libraries &amp; frameworks; all the ones I&#x27;ve googled are too recent to be right), and helped me realise that what I want to do is write code that calls, not code that is called. I want to own main().<p>As an aside, I really miss Joel on Software and the similar high-quality blogs which existed in the mid-2000s. It seems like Twitter, Facebook and Medium have sucked all the air, the life, the joy and the quality out of online presence and discussion. I know that there are still a few holdouts trying to keep things going, but … it seems to be a losing battle.

This stood the test of time. After ten years we still struggle with the same issue.<p>Of course now we have containers to store these factory factory factories. Which makes it easier to store and handle and now you can deploy the factory factory factory containers next to the resources held in containers as well so you don&#x27;t have to pay for the shipping cost of the said resources. Of course the finished hammer, wood and everything else still has to be shipped to you.<p>And if that wasn&#x27;t enough, we created a self-contained mini factory for your home, which takes the packaged hammer, nail and wood components and assembles them real time. Just for your convenience.<p>Of course this mini factory has to be assembled as well by your factory factory factory containers before it will be shipped to you.<p>See how easy it is?

This is really a critique of J2EE. This was the dominant approach when Rails came out and helped make Rails so successful.<p>Making specific critiques of specific eco-systems is valid. E.g. Java back then was awful. JS right now is complex (though I think there is some great stuff in there). Making sweeping critiques of all frameworks is pretty stupid. Unless, of course, you build everything on an OS you wrote yourself in assembler. Frameworks are just a form of abstraction. Abstraction can be done well or poorly, but to make a blanket claim that abstraction is bad is to ignore the huge efficiency gains we&#x27;ve make from abstractions like operating systems, web browsers, HTTP servers, and so on, which are all frameworks of a kind.

Is this only a problem with Java frameworks? (The hammer-factory-building-factory talk leads me to believe that).<p>I stared learning Django a few years ago and have never looked back, it has increased my productivity loads. Admittedly its reasonably opinionated about the style of app you are building (but it covers the majority of apps and you don&#x27;t need to use every part of the framework).

We build complicated software with simple tools where I work using Clojure. There&#x27;s even a talk about Java:Powertools::Clojure:Handtools! [1]<p>[1] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=ShEez0JkOFw" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=ShEez0JkOFw</a>

The whole killing girlfriend thing is not so cool. I would remove those pieces, they don&#x27;t add much to the story.

Interesting that this post seems to be dated right around when Rails was just getting popular and starting the &quot;next-generation&quot; web frameworks trend.

Pretty funny but I think that the article is overcomplicating it. In reality, each framework is more like a toolbox; and each toolbox is suited for a specific range of jobs.<p>Building an app without a framework can sometimes feel like buying a nailgun and nails separately - It may be difficult to find the right kinds of nails which are compatible with that specific nailgun (if they exist at all)!<p>If you use a framework, you&#x27;ll get the nailgun with compatible nails and a bunch of other related tools... You might not use all the tools from the toolbox, but at least all the tools work well with each other.<p>Of course, if you have to perform a double heart bypass surgery on someone and you come equipped with a carpenter&#x27;s toolbox; the outcome will be disappointing... Regardless of how good a surgeon you are.

This article has been a pivotal point in my life. It was years ago when I read this that I started looking out &quot;how to develop a webapp without a framework&quot;, my journey took me to Django, RoR, node and finally to Go.<p>I did learn on my own by reading a few books and countless videos about how to write a webapp without a framework. The result was that I wrote an introductory book for my own reference, the link is here.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;thewhitetulip&#x2F;web-dev-golang-anti-textbook&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;thewhitetulip&#x2F;web-dev-golang-anti-textboo...</a><p>I do not know the author, but I would like to thank him&#x2F;her, it is because of their article that I went on to learn Go.<p>Thank You!!

I first learned to code by following those lovely, magical Ruby on Rails videos back in the day.<p>A few years later I discovered Sinatra and felt liberated.

After 11 years, I can say Why I hate frameworks and Why I love Go (www.golang.org) \o&#x2F;

sofaking right on, especially these days.

Is anyone else bothered by the repeated, completely out of context reference to murdering women with a hammer?

Too bad building software isn&#x27;t at all like building a spice rack unless you&#x27;re taking about continually rebuilding a spice rack and replacing its components constantly till it turns into a house (as 99% of software is wont to do).