Yes it could be fixed, but even then I don't think it is worth it.
The early language designers too got excited at the thought of generalizing subroutines to be able to suspend and resume rather than return once (especially before the call stack, where activation records are naturally ephemeral), but this was wisely abandoned.
Later we see much interest in actor models, and they too are disergonomic, and a skeuomorphism from planning people.
What's important is note the nodes, but the dataflow between them: programming is plumbing not connecting increasingly complicated pipe fittings. Most people get this dead wrong, and microservice are just the latest misunderstanding. All it has over the others is the unhealthy synergy with Conway's law.
The early language designers too got excited at the thought of generalizing subroutines to be able to suspend and resume rather than return once (especially before the call stack, where activation records are naturally ephemeral), but this was wisely abandoned.
Later we see much interest in actor models, and they too are disergonomic, and a skeuomorphism from planning people.
What's important is note the nodes, but the dataflow between them: programming is plumbing not connecting increasingly complicated pipe fittings. Most people get this dead wrong, and microservice are just the latest misunderstanding. All it has over the others is the unhealthy synergy with Conway's law.
reply