samrose
Looking for opinions.
I am in discussion with someone who would like to restructure phoenix project file structure so that model, view, controller, and tests will be all in one folder per named “feature” (let’s say “blog”)
I am looking for feedback on what the tradeoffs would be for doing this.
The argument for it is that “everything you need to find for the feature would be in one folder. This should be easier for everyone to find and use these files”. But are there fundamental reasons not to restructure a phoenix project in this way? I know it would lose compatibility with with code generators. However, would this also push people off track in their reasoning about he code? What are the impacts if any, for doing this?
Thanks!
Trending in Questions
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
Hi everyone.
My team and I have been working on a fairly modest app based around video streaming and chat, but we’ve landed a customer t...
New
Hello,
I’m trying to build a basic Phoenix web-app, and I’d like to use Tailwind.
However, when I launch mix phx.server, I get an error...
New
I really like the adapter patterns that ecto, nebulex, waffle, etc. use and would love find something similar for a key management servic...
New
Hello folks!
So at work, we are seeing some situations where we have to define some “fixed” strings that are used across the codebase in...
New
How Can I Optimise Compile Time Dependencies
I have been building an elixir application for about 2 years now. Many modules and files ha...
New
Other Trending Topics
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders.
I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
I fully migrated to my own harness from Anthropic/Gemini and I think it’s time to share it. Welcome DSH, the DeepSeek Harness, fully writ...
New
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New
I love Elixir. It’s one of 2 programming languages I’ve ever fallen in love with.
But I don’t use it anymore.
Serverless was the promis...
New
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Popular Tags
- #ecto
- #liveview
- #troubleshooting
- #learning-elixir
- #library
- #deployment
- #erlang
- #testing
- #genserver
- #mix
- #absinthe
- #remote-other
- #otp
- #plug
- #how-to-question
- #macros
- #postgres
- #elixirconf
- #channels
- #exunit
- #discussion
- #code-sync
- #podcasts
- #javascript
- #onsite
- #dialyzer
- #docker
- #authentication
- #ai
- #umbrella
- #full-time-contract
- #podcasts-by-brainlid
- #ecto-query
- #blog-post
- #elixirconf-us
- #elixir-ls
- #phoenix_html
- #iex
- #graphql
- #genstage
- #websockets
- #supervisor
- #advent-of-code
- #distillery
- #processes
- #elixirconf-eu
- #api
- #forms
- #security
- #metaprogramming










Showing Posts 1 to 10- Show Best Posts
- Show All (oldest first)
- Show All (newest first)
BartOtten
Have a look in this topic: Discussion about domain-orientated folder structures in Phoenix
dimitarvp
Has this person considered code that must be reused between two or more features? Then their idea kind of falls apart.
benwilson512
Controller / view code isn’t really this way though. I definitely agree with you that
"model"code definitely doesn’t belong to a specific controller. However for controller / view stuff there’s a decent argument for favoring a “pod” structure.While not exactly the same, LiveView definitely takes more of a “page” oriented structure since with a given live view + leex / heex template you generally have a bunch of functionality all right next to each other.
dimitarvp
I don’t disagree but let’s take this to the extreme: should each feature have a copy of the root layout code then?
The stance described in OP seems too extremist and narrow-minded to me. Partially applied it is valuable but I’ve rarely seen people advocate for such things in an moderate manner. It’s usually an all-or-nothing affair. Maybe it was a bad luck on my part, I don’t know.
samrose
Thank you!
samrose
The way being proposed is indeed all the model, view, controller as described FWIW
BartOtten
In practice, it’s never about the extremes though. As there is a ‘data’ App and a separate ‘web’ AppWeb both styles can be used together.
If we look at how the phx generator creates the data app, we see vertical slicing as far as I can remember. Except for migrations which are all in one folder*. It’s the web app that (historically) uses horizontal slicing and although it can be beneficial, I rather use vertical slicing there too.
LiveView seems to move towards vertical slicing, with the template files next to the rest of the code for a page/view.
*Django puts migrations within the ‘feature’. Con: touch two features at once and you have two separated migration files.
BartOtten
I would not favor an all-in-one approach with models next to views, as having both an data app and web app makes a good boundary. So there I draw a line: The data app is meant for handling data requests, the web app for handling web requests. Easy distinction
.
It also allows me to have a clear seperation between types of ‘frontend’. For example:
data/
web_api/ (using jwt tokens)
web_live/ (using sessions)
Sasa Juric (iphone won’t let me spell it correctly) has a good blog serie about the way the company he works for separates code(files). Highly recommend to read them.
BartOtten
Although being designed for React, you can find value information about vertical slicing in there.
stefanchrobot
I use that approach in my app and I’m pretty happy with it! I don’t use generators though. I even have two separate “
myapp_web.ex” files - one for the SSR app and one for the API: