That title I would call sensationalist. Our tooling choices don't have to take this king-of-the-molehill, all or nothing, "did X just kill Y?" extreme stance. (I thought the article made some reasonable points, though.)
With so much conflicting wisdom to sort through - "yuck, monolith!", "omakase!", "YAGNI!", "not enough abstraction!", "too much abstraction!" - we should admit that we often end up leaning on instinct/emotion when making these decisions.
Just remember that you don't have to pick one philosophy and stick with it for all time exclusively. Often down the road you'll see the value in something you thought you had sworn off.
Comments
That title I would call sensationalist. Our tooling choices don't have to take this king-of-the-molehill, all or nothing, "did X just kill Y?" extreme stance. (I thought the article made some reasonable points, though.)
With so much conflicting wisdom to sort through - "yuck, monolith!", "omakase!", "YAGNI!", "not enough abstraction!", "too much abstraction!" - we should admit that we often end up leaning on instinct/emotion when making these decisions.
Just remember that you don't have to pick one philosophy and stick with it for all time exclusively. Often down the road you'll see the value in something you thought you had sworn off.