FizzBuzzEnterpris VS Scrawl-canvas

> I'll answer your question with a question: Have you seen https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris... ? :)

You can write that kind of crap in any language, including C++.

There’s a difference between complexity that’s inherent to the problem, and complexity that’s added by developers who have drunk architectural cool aid.

This is an example where all of the complexity is caused by rigid adherence to the most popular architectural patterns of about 10 years ago.

https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

It looks completely ridiculous to modern eyes, but during peak OOP it was just how you should do it.

If you like simplicity then your fizz buzz implementation would be a few lines.

https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris... isn't too far removed from some of what I've seen in big tech, especially architecture-wise. Certainly less costly absurdity.

What you need is Fizzbuzz, Enterprise Edition

https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

It's been a decade since I used C# but the corporate design pattern culture of that language back then turned me off of it forever.

Everything looked like this: https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

Maybe it's better now but the Java/C# practice of shoveling largely empty classes around with an IDE isn't something I'd point to as a good example.

```

With your example I had to think for about 1-2 min before it made sense. If the codebase is full of clever stuff then I have to spend hours understanding all of the clever things before I can make changes. If everything is simple then it's easy to change.

If you want to see where overengineering leads you then take a look at this project. https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

It is satire but I have absolutely worked in places that write code like that.

Good programmers know that it's 10x times harder to read code than write it, so they deliberately keep it simple so that they can read it later.

I did something similar a 4 or so years back. I wrote something in a month (+ a couple of working with stakeholders to make sure it did what it should). I did it in a legacy tech stack that the architects didn't like, on the side of the main activity, as the deadline was coming close and some hireing processes were slow.

A team of around devs 5 (some coming and going) having been trying to solve the same problem since, but they're still not being close to finished.

In other words, the productivity is in the order 50x to 100x slower than when I did it. Rather, the main reason was that I knew how to write code like that, while they were set up to fail.

Basically, some architect was making all sorts of unnecessary demands for how to wite the code, and the programers were not familiar with much of the tech stack that was introduced.

Also, coding standards were really verbose, easily 10x-30x what I wrote, in lines of code. The current state of what they have look suspiciously like FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition:

https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

TLDR; Incompetent tech leadership prone to cargo-culting, can slow down productivity to virtually zero. In some cases, productivity can go up by ~100x if ignoring their demands.

I swear I've worked with people who if they were shown FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition wouldn't be able to see the joke as that's how they naturally write all code.

https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

Reminds me of FizzBuzzEnterpriseEdition . https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

You never know when you might need to change the implementation of how the "Fuzz" string is returned, so you need a FuzzStringReturner.

And you never know when you might need multiple different ways of returning "Fuzz", so you need a FuzzStringReturnerFactory.

And that barely scratches the surface of what you need.

I don't like Typescript because it forces me to think about types and data structures and stuff. Which is a Good Thing because I absolutely have to think about that stuff when working on large codebases with a team of colleagues: without the inline documentation and text editor help TS gives me when working on those codebases I'd be (at least!) 10x slower when refactoring old code or adding new code. And nobody wants to pay a slow developer!

However ... the one place I refuse to use Typescript is in my side project - a JS canvas library. I can justify this because: 1. it's a big codebase, but I know every line of it intimately having spent the last 10 years (re-)writing it; 2. nobody else contributes (and I kinda like it that way); and 3. I keep a close eye on competing canvas libraries and I've watched several of them go through the immense (frustrating!) work of converting their codebases to TS over the past few years and, seriously, I don't need that pain in my not-paid-for life.

Even so, I do maintain a .d.ts file for the library's 'API' (the functions devs would use when building a canvas using my library) because the testing, documentation and autocompletion help it offers is too useful to ignore. It is additional work, but it's just one file[1] and I can live with that.

[1] https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas/blob/v8/source/s...

> working with glyphs and iterating them in reverse for RTL is brain-breaking. And line wrapping gets really complicated. It's also the most obscure because nobody has written down everything you need to know in one place

I can confirm this. I've been working on a (much simpler!) text layout engine for my canvas library over the past couple of months and the amount of complexity associated with just stamping some glyphs onto a canvas has left me screaming at my laptop on an almost daily basis. Getting a decent underline was a proud moment!

Question: did you ever find out what algorithm the various browsers are using to calculate how many words can fit on a given line? I'm almost there, except words will occasionally jump between lines when I scale the text. Really annoying!

The PR's still a work in progress, but I've got all the functionality I want in there (shaping lines to fit in non-rectangular containers, styling text, text along a non-straight line, dynamic updates, etc). Just need to test and document it all now ... https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas/pull/75

I've got myself organised and prepared a List Of Things To Do[1] to make my 2D Javascript library even better than it already is. Given that I've been working on the library for over 10 years now, and have never before set out such a list, I call this Progress!

[1] https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas/discussions/cate...

'Kay, I don't know if this anywhere close to what the OP wants, but this sort of live browser tab manipulation is possible to do using a mix of a a canvas element and the browser's Screen Capture API[1] (plus my JS canvas library, once I merge and publish the changes into its next release[2]).

This solution[3] shows the modified browser tab in a separate browser tab. I've got no idea whether it's possible to do the same sort of trick in the same tab (but probably not). I also have no idea how secure the Screen Capture API is - I'd get very nervous about doing this sort of thing when looking at my bank's online portal!

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Screen_Capt...

[2] https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas/pull/57

[3] Youtube video of the effect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCi6LmKMAo0

My canvas library's README[1] has a video embedded in it. FWIW I'm not convinced it adds anything to the library's sales pitch.

[1] https://github.com/KaliedaRik/Scrawl-canvas

> And I’m just mentioning some of the unfixable problems with this approach

I agree that using a canvas instead of leveraging existing accessibility supplied by HTML/CSS/JS and the DOM is an accessibility nightmare.

However, I disagree that canvas accessibility issues are "unfixable". Difficult? Yes. But not unfixable. In my view, the element works best in partnership with its wider environment (HTML/CSS/JS and the DOM), not as a replacement for it. With that in mind, we can start to tackle the accessibility issues you raise - fonts, links, interactions, etc.[1][2]

I have an ambition to one day become intelligent enough to understand/code in Rust, and I'm really glad to see that people are thinking about accessibility as a fundamental part of UIs being developed in Rust.

[1] - Which is what my JS 2d canvas library tries to do: https://scrawl-v8.rikweb.org.uk/

[2] - My thoughts on accessibility, and how I try to fix them using my library: https://scrawl-v8.rikweb.org.uk/learn/eleventh-lesson/

If, however, your company is set on this course, I very strongly suggest you use a canvas library - if only for the MVP. Here's my canvas library (spam alert!) ... even if you don't use it in your product, the library might help give you some ideas on how to overcome some of the responsive, interactive and accessibility issues you'll be facing.

Scrawl-canvas - example and another example (links to code at bottom of each page)