I binge-watched this entire series last weekend. These are some of the best examples of applying DDD-principles in code I have come across. Where I work, we're currently in the process of rewriting our legacy back-end using DDD. It's very interesting to see how similar our technical approaches are, but there are some very interesting differences as well. Overall I would say your architecture is simpler and cleaner. There are definitely some ideas in these series I will be discussing with our team! Are you perhaps planning to visit DDD Europe or any other conferences this year?
Thank you for the kind words! I worked hard on the series over the course of a year to put it together. I'm not particularly skilled at video production so it was a labor and to hear that you appreciated it means a lot. I really hope to make it to DDD Europe this year, it's my favorite conference. But it comes down to what my company chooses to do.
Thank you so much. This is invaluable content. Explaining models as abstracted conceptual version of reality was really helpful for me. It sounds similar to physical models, where models are conceptual intermediaries (representings) of the physical world (represented) and, are validated through scientific method. This similarity really helped in understanding models. Respresentings and represented are also isomorphic and the examples scholar gives is of algebra (representing) and geometry (represented). So all i all I now understand models similarly as in they are isomorphic to business objects and processes and validation I suppose is done through unit testing.
Another thought was about physical models essentially modeling regularities in the physical world similarly model probably can be thought of concepts defining regularities in a business.
I binge-watched this entire series last weekend. These are some of the best examples of applying DDD-principles in code I have come across.
Where I work, we're currently in the process of rewriting our legacy back-end using DDD. It's very interesting to see how similar our technical approaches are, but there are some very interesting differences as well. Overall I would say your architecture is simpler and cleaner. There are definitely some ideas in these series I will be discussing with our team!
Are you perhaps planning to visit DDD Europe or any other conferences this year?
Thank you for the kind words! I worked hard on the series over the course of a year to put it together. I'm not particularly skilled at video production so it was a labor and to hear that you appreciated it means a lot.
I really hope to make it to DDD Europe this year, it's my favorite conference. But it comes down to what my company chooses to do.
Thank you so much. This is invaluable content. Explaining models as abstracted conceptual version of reality was really helpful for me. It sounds similar to physical models, where models are conceptual intermediaries (representings) of the physical world (represented) and, are validated through scientific method. This similarity really helped in understanding models. Respresentings and represented are also isomorphic and the examples scholar gives is of algebra (representing) and geometry (represented). So all i all I now understand models similarly as in they are isomorphic to business objects and processes and validation I suppose is done through unit testing.
Another thought was about physical models essentially modeling regularities in the physical world similarly model probably can be thought of concepts defining regularities in a business.