Comments by "Vincent Jenks" (@VincentJenks) on "Fireship" channel.

  1. 22
  2. 4
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. While this is interesting, I'm always wary of these layers-upon-layers of magical abstractions. All cost concerns aside, which can easily be controlled and aren't the boogyman man of the comments might suggest; you're not learning enough about the underlying infrastructure you're maniuplating. All abstractions come with this cost. Even with CDK, which I've adopted and started using because you need some sort of IaC tool for automation, you've got to understand what's happening under your code. To me, if you're strictly AWS, CDK is the way to go, and adding another layer on top of that might be easier, but you learn and understand less of the consequences of what you're executing. All that being said, we're mired in frameworks, built atop frameworks, embedded with endless layers of abstraction and configuration. There's a shiny new toy every-other-day. You can chase your tail around for years and never settle on "THE stack"...and all of these toys achieve the same thing, in the end. At what point do you select "the best" tools and stick to them for more than a few months, or even a few years? As neat as this is, I prefer to stay as close to the "bare metal" as possible, while accepting that the market will push you into certain things that you have no choice in adopting. Keep it as simple as possible, even if it's more difficult and requires a little more code and understanding. These frameworks come and go, seemingly overnight. If you stick to strong fundamentals and as few abstractions as possible, you'll waste less time and build more stable environments.
    1