I think every programmer knows that businesses love to take technical shortcuts and are willing to "leak" quality if it gets them an economic product (or profit) more quickly...
In a way, Eventual Consistency is just a way of making that work for you rather than trying to fight the tide. Just limit your exposure at the system-boundaries.
"Hey look buddy, I'm an Engineer. That means I solve problems. Not problems like 'was that moral?', because that would fall within the purview of your conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems."
But seriously: Not necessarily, but it's quite possible to "morally" shoot yourself in the foot.
Comments
I think every programmer knows that businesses love to take technical shortcuts and are willing to "leak" quality if it gets them an economic product (or profit) more quickly...
In a way, Eventual Consistency is just a way of making that work for you rather than trying to fight the tide. Just limit your exposure at the system-boundaries.
Are they wrong to do this?
"Hey look buddy, I'm an Engineer. That means I solve problems. Not problems like 'was that moral?', because that would fall within the purview of your conundrums of philosophy. I solve practical problems."
But seriously: Not necessarily, but it's quite possible to "morally" shoot yourself in the foot.