Beautiful architecture reading (3)

Chapter 2(Last Chapter ):

This is one of the most interesting chapters I have ever read, although I suspect that he has not made a clear definition of the strong type.

I found that every employee who has two knives has one characteristic: An endless stream of news.

(There is also a kind of additional metaphor and hazy beauty ~)

What kind of architecture, Tao, philosophy, mathematics... some can even write young female-style literature or Lihua.

However, if we ignore their opinions on various technologies in their speeches, it would be a pleasure to read such an article.

(In addition, his judgment on why SmallTalk is not popular may also be one of the factors)

The old man quoted the father of the design pattern as follows:

"The entire academic field is developed around the idea of" Design Methods ", and I am also seen as one of the advocates of these so-called design methods. I am very sorry for this. I would like to publicly declare that I totally refuse to study the design method as a subject, because I think it is ridiculous to separate the design research and design practices. In fact, people who learn design methods rather than practice design are almost all failed designers. They are not energetic, they lose the impulse to create things, or they have never had such an impulse ."(Christopher Alexander, 1971)

This can be my own statement, especially considering that I have done some in-depth work on some design methods.

For a long time, my differences with methodology enthusiasts and popular followers are also being discussed.

Of course, everyone has their own values. I never want to output any value, as long as we all live happily.

Chapter 5:

I have nothing to say about this chapter: if you are interested in REST, you should take a look. This article clarifies the idea of REST.

I cannot fully agree that the author emphasizes the difference between actions and resources (B), rather than looking at the problem at a higher level.

In fact, actions can be a type of resource. From this perspective, A return can be the value (A) that the two resources jointly locate ).

For specific actions, such as the difference between GET and POST, it is only for temporary optimization measures in different special circumstances.

However, one reason why (A) is less practical in the Web and RESTful architectures is that URLs are not good at expressing dual (multiple) distributions.

This may be the reason why the author or other RESTful backbone followers emphasize separation of action and Reclamation (B ).

But this (B) is not a truly free two-dimensional model: there are only four actions with clear connotations, which leads to uncomfortable restrictions.

In turn, from the perspective I described (A), you can easily add dimensions.

Of course, their perspective (B) can also be expanded like mine, but sticking to some RESTful principles becomes meaningless.

Update:

It seems that I did not mention the contradiction between my perspective (A) and the URL that cannot express each component. But this is only a matter of encoding.

It is only for the reading barrier of humans. We need to measure the problem: Do we need to solve it? No? (Fundamentally)

Chapter 6:

This chapter introduces the Open Architecture of Facebook, which is more practical. If you are interested, please take a look.

FBML makes me feel very familiar with ASP. NET. As you can see, this person is switching from M $...

I basically don't want to pick any thorns on a big framework, but I think Facebook is not open enough.

However, in FBML, I do not like this method of polluting HTML documents. Special logic should be placed independently.

Are you sure you want to know that I am working on this.