Wrote a blog post on the value of multiple changesets:
https://medium.com/@QuantLayer/more-changesets-less-problems-bec2ca502364#.fq0t5n3by
Hope you find it helpful. Any feedback is a welcome.
vikram7
hubertlepicki
minhajuddin
knav_negi
Hi Everyone,
I just wrote a blog about using Elixir processes as aggregate roots in DDD. Please let me know your views about it.
https://medium.com/@naveennegi/domain-driven-design-in-elixir-4dc416ac0a36
3
dom
What’s the added value of GenServer in this example? If read caching is what you’re looking for, I think ETS would be a much better idea. Using GenServers to represent objects makes your application complicated and brittle. For instance, since you’re using casts, in a high load situation the message queues can keep growing until the VM runs out of memory.
It’s similar to the discussion on To spawn, or not to spawn? and the Functional Web Development with Elixir, OTP, and Phoenix book thread.
0
ludat
Here is a blogpost about some not so basic aspects of Elixir, Dissecting a fresh Elixir application hope you enjoy it
2
OvermindDL1
chvanikoff
Hi,
I just published an article about refactoring std_json_io library, hope will be of interest for some of you: https://medium.com/@chvanikoff/lets-refactor-std-json-io-e444b6f2c580.
1
OvermindDL1
michalmuskala
This is a great summary. I think it could be improved even further by mentioning one important aspect - naming things.
In particular the naming conventions around packages that build on top of other packages, e.g. ecto extensions, some reusable plugs, etc. It’s tempting to put your library under the Ecto.Whatever namespace, but that’s a bad idea. The Ecto namespace is already owned by the Ecto package itself and it’s easy to see what problems it might cause if it decides to add a module called Ecto.Whatever itself. It’s usually a much better idea to make the main namespace WhateverEcto or EctoWhatever - something unique to the new package.