Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Software Architecture & Frameworks

Software Architecture & Frameworks

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
asp-netdesignsecurityregexarchitecture
13 Posts 11 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Offline
    S Offline
    Simon Lee Shugar
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

    Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

    V R R J M 6 Replies Last reply
    0
    • S Simon Lee Shugar

      For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

      Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

      V Offline
      V Offline
      Vark111
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Quote:

      Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks

      I use the same architecture, patterns, and frameworks just by virtue of the fact that all of my boilerplate code (pre-built interfaces, base classes, extension methods, etc...) are already built for a specific toolset. If I change from NHibernate to EF, or from Unity to Ninject (as a couple of examples) I'd have to re-write a lot of that. Not that I can't do that - my common library isn't *that* big - I would just need some rather compelling improvements to justify it. And since I already have a lot of that boilerplate stuff written, all of my projects end up having the same architecture. Even my little one-off apps use the repository pattern because I only have to write a handful of lines of code and a mapping XML file and I'm ready to persist to a DB (assuming my one-off app has to persist to a DB).

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • S Simon Lee Shugar

        For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

        Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

        R Offline
        R Offline
        Rutvik Dave
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Software Architecture depends upon three things. - Type of Project: Highly Scalable, Highly Available, Complex, Simple, Multiple Devices, Multiple Platforms, Small, In-House, Device Specific - Team Size: Small but Good, Small but OK, Large but Good, Large but OK - Timeline: Enough, Not-Enough, Insane, Side Project You shouldn't follow the same software design everywhere. You can't keep creating software with 3-tier with repository patterns, sometimes it's overkill, sometimes it's time consuming. Sometimes no one from the team wants to learn new technology i.e. Code First. So it depends...

        Remind Me This - Manage, Collaborate and Execute your Project in the Cloud

        L 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • S Simon Lee Shugar

          For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

          Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

          R Offline
          R Offline
          R Giskard Reventlov
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          If the application will need to store and manipulate data, start there.

          "If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. Those who seek perfection will only find imperfection nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me me, in pictures

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • S Simon Lee Shugar

            For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

            Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

            J Offline
            J Offline
            Jorgen Andersson
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            I recommend Reading this thread[^] before considering to use a framework. There is very much good advise there.

            Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello[^]

            S 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R Rutvik Dave

              Software Architecture depends upon three things. - Type of Project: Highly Scalable, Highly Available, Complex, Simple, Multiple Devices, Multiple Platforms, Small, In-House, Device Specific - Team Size: Small but Good, Small but OK, Large but Good, Large but OK - Timeline: Enough, Not-Enough, Insane, Side Project You shouldn't follow the same software design everywhere. You can't keep creating software with 3-tier with repository patterns, sometimes it's overkill, sometimes it's time consuming. Sometimes no one from the team wants to learn new technology i.e. Code First. So it depends...

              Remind Me This - Manage, Collaborate and Execute your Project in the Cloud

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Rutvik Dave wrote:

              Team Size: Small but Good, Small but OK, Large but Good, Large but OK

              You missed "large but a bunch of wankers"

              J 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • L Lost User

                Rutvik Dave wrote:

                Team Size: Small but Good, Small but OK, Large but Good, Large but OK

                You missed "large but a bunch of wankers"

                J Offline
                J Offline
                JimmyRopes
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                _Maxxx_ wrote:

                You missed "large but a bunch of wankers"

                I have seen that more than once. :^) It seems that management likes to spend everything available in the budget. Use it or lose it mentality. X|

                The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
                Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
                I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • J Jorgen Andersson

                  I recommend Reading this thread[^] before considering to use a framework. There is very much good advise there.

                  Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello[^]

                  S Offline
                  S Offline
                  Simon Lee Shugar
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Thank you, good threat, think I am grasping the different aspects. Decided I was trying to much at once.

                  Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

                  T 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S Simon Lee Shugar

                    Thank you, good threat, think I am grasping the different aspects. Decided I was trying to much at once.

                    Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

                    T Offline
                    T Offline
                    thatraja
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Simon Lee Shugar wrote:

                    Thank you, good threat

                    :-D

                    thatraja

                    Code converters | Education Needed No thanks, I am all stocked up. - Luc Pattyn When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is - Henry Minute

                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • S Simon Lee Shugar

                      For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

                      Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

                      M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Marc Greiner at home
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      This kind of framework exists already, done properly, for example in DevExpress XAF (eXpressApp Framework). By done properly, I mean that it has it all, you only concentrate on your business: 1. You design the business model, UML style: All types of relations are supported: 1-1, 1-n, n-m, parent-child, etc. 2. You click the “Compile” button. 3. You get: - the WinForms business application AND - the Web application, built automatically, designed like you would have done it (maybe even better...), totally configurable, even at runtime. - The database is generated (or updated) for you, with proper tables, fields, indexes, constraints, etc., be it MSSQL, Oracle, you name it (for 12 different RDBMs). 4. As a bonus, you get: User, Roles, Authorization (per class, record or even at the field level), Active Directory login, Auditing, dynamic layout of lists and detail layouts, localization (even at runtime), reporting, etc... the list goes on: you name it, they have it, top notch support included. Most of the features are runtime configurable. For example, you can create reports at runtime, in a full fledged award winning visual designer. It is compatible with Entity Framework, although it proposes the DevExpress XPO by default, with which I believe you can better fine tune specific use cases. The library comes at around 2200 $ per developer. When I demonstrated it to a colleague, he thought that it could cost 100.000 of $, no joke. Note that a XAF project is nothing other than a standard .NET project, you are not bound to any hypothetic limits that XAF would impose you. Some links to mind blowing demos: Amanda building a small XAF business application in 10 minutes[^] Seth showing XAF in depth (1h 10mn video that highlights many basic features of XAF)[^] Some articles abouts XAF here at code project: Getting the Job Done with XAF[^] Using Domain Components (

                      B 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • T thatraja

                        Simon Lee Shugar wrote:

                        Thank you, good threat

                        :-D

                        thatraja

                        Code converters | Education Needed No thanks, I am all stocked up. - Luc Pattyn When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is - Henry Minute

                        S Offline
                        S Offline
                        Simon Lee Shugar
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        Ah! Well it is a Friday! I like multi-threat applications anyway!

                        Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • M Marc Greiner at home

                          This kind of framework exists already, done properly, for example in DevExpress XAF (eXpressApp Framework). By done properly, I mean that it has it all, you only concentrate on your business: 1. You design the business model, UML style: All types of relations are supported: 1-1, 1-n, n-m, parent-child, etc. 2. You click the “Compile” button. 3. You get: - the WinForms business application AND - the Web application, built automatically, designed like you would have done it (maybe even better...), totally configurable, even at runtime. - The database is generated (or updated) for you, with proper tables, fields, indexes, constraints, etc., be it MSSQL, Oracle, you name it (for 12 different RDBMs). 4. As a bonus, you get: User, Roles, Authorization (per class, record or even at the field level), Active Directory login, Auditing, dynamic layout of lists and detail layouts, localization (even at runtime), reporting, etc... the list goes on: you name it, they have it, top notch support included. Most of the features are runtime configurable. For example, you can create reports at runtime, in a full fledged award winning visual designer. It is compatible with Entity Framework, although it proposes the DevExpress XPO by default, with which I believe you can better fine tune specific use cases. The library comes at around 2200 $ per developer. When I demonstrated it to a colleague, he thought that it could cost 100.000 of $, no joke. Note that a XAF project is nothing other than a standard .NET project, you are not bound to any hypothetic limits that XAF would impose you. Some links to mind blowing demos: Amanda building a small XAF business application in 10 minutes[^] Seth showing XAF in depth (1h 10mn video that highlights many basic features of XAF)[^] Some articles abouts XAF here at code project: Getting the Job Done with XAF[^] Using Domain Components (

                          B Offline
                          B Offline
                          Brady Kelly
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          I've only experimented with ZAF, but it is mindblowing.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • S Simon Lee Shugar

                            For the last couple of years I have simply not needed to think about the architecture of a project, I have worked on one core codebase that has been pretty much set up. I've created smaller projects, mostly internal stuff and kept them to a decent standard but now I want to start thinking about the architecture, frameworks and design patterns. I have been looking into Entity Framework Code First, using a tiered architecture (repository pattern) and throwing stuff like membership, enterprise libary (for logging and security). Code first simply because I want to try it, EF because it is something I want to be experienced in. So my questions are how do you choose how you architect a project, do you use the same design patterns, principles and frameworks if the scope allows? Do you like to stick to a certain architecture and use the same frameworks if again the project scope allows?

                            Simon Lee Shugar (Software Developer) www.simonshugar.co.uk "If something goes by a false name, would it mean that thing is fake? False by nature?" By Gilbert Durandil

                            A Offline
                            A Offline
                            Acaz Souza Pereira
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            Today when I think about architecture I think that a good architecture should be able to support a reliable system at least 5 years. I think mostly about abstraction, identify abstract points in the system and build a structure to allow a more easily maintence and building, without close the system to extensions, your structure should have points of extension.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            Reply
                            • Reply as topic
                            Log in to reply
                            • Oldest to Newest
                            • Newest to Oldest
                            • Most Votes


                            • Login

                            • Don't have an account? Register

                            • Login or register to search.
                            • First post
                              Last post
                            0
                            • Categories
                            • Recent
                            • Tags
                            • Popular
                            • World
                            • Users
                            • Groups