News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A FactoryFactoryFactory in Production. Parent comment

Re:A FactoryFactoryFactory in Production by jeff571 on Monday December 18, 2017 @01:32PM (#15953964)
I'm sorry but you can't possibly be serious. There is no sane motivation for a *FactoryFactoryFactory class. No problem on earth is complex enough to benefit from that much abstraction.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A FactoryFactoryFactory in Production by ganonm on Monday December 18, 2017 @01:42PM (#15954089)
What, serious about wanting to know why it is in their codebase? Yes, I'm 100% serious. If they're currently using it in production I'd assume there's a good reason for it. Plus, I'm pretty sure the folks over at LinkedIn engineering are definitely serious. In any case I'm very curious as to why (rightly or wrongly) it's in there.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A FactoryFactoryFactory in Production by jeff571 on Monday December 18, 2017 @01:48PM (#15954163)
It's in their codebase because they catastrophically over engineered it. Even the largest codebases on earth don't require FactoryFactoryFactory's.
[ Parent | on HN ]