this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2025
112 points (96.7% liked)
Programming
23348 readers
261 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
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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The main lie about these principles is that they would lead to less maintenance work.
But go ahead and change your database model. Add a field. Then add support for it to your program's code base. Let's see how many parts you need to change of your well-architected enterprise-grade software solution.
Sure, it might be a lot of places, it might not(well designed microservice arch says hi.)
What proper OOP design does is to make the changes required to be predictable and easily documented. Which in turn can make a many step process faster.
I have a hard time believing that microservices can possibly be a well designed architecture.
We take a hard problem like architecture and communication and add to it networking, latency, potential calling protocol inconsistency, encoding and decoding (with more potential inconsistency), race conditions, nondeterminacy and more.
And what do I get in return? json everywhere? Subteams that don't feel the need to talk to each other? No one ever thinks about architecture ever again?
I don't see the appeal.
I guess it's possible I've been doing OOP wrong for the past 30 years, knowing someone like you has experienced code bases that uphold that promise.
Right, knowing when to apply the principles is the thing that comes with experience.
If you’ve literally never seen the benefits of abstraction doing OOP for thirty years, I’m not sure what to tell you. Maybe you’ve just been implementing boilerplate on short-term projects.
I’ve definitely seen lots of benefits from some of the SOLID principles over the same time period, but I was using what I needed when I needed it, not implementing enterprise boilerplate blindly.
I admit this is harder with Java because the “EE” comes with it but no one is forcing you to make sure your DataAccessObject inherits from a class that follows a defined interface.
We all have or own experiences.
Mine is that it helps in organization, which makes changes easier.