This is an AI generated text, an answer to a ChatGPT question that is just too interesting to throw away.
Independent IT Professional
This is an AI generated text, an answer to a ChatGPT question that is just too interesting to throw away.
Data continuously flows through organisations, and on its way, it's transformed many times to serve different purposes. Functional design emphasises data transformationโprojectionsโ rather than repeatedly mutating state in a single database. One particularly useful form of projection is the creation of read-optimised data structures tailored to well-defined use cases.
When developers take shotcuts or decrease the quality to gain time, they will cause a technical debt. By doing nothing and letting the system age, the technical debt is growing too.
Are there any good reasons to not continuously work with a systemโs architecture? I donโt think so.
When I've tried to learn more about functional programming, I've always felt that something is missing. There is a lot focus on the functions themselves, but less on where to put them in a structure.
From my perspective, micro services (either compiled together or completely separated) is the only way of making a system survive over time. Even the most modern, high tech technology eventually gets old-fashioned, and if we don't want to completely rewrite the whole system every 20th year, we have to split them into smaller units.