flyde VS c4-notation

Yes! As a big fan of functional-reactive programming, it was important to me that Flyde builds on that foundation, and doesn't fall into more imperative paradigms.

With that being said, Flyde does offer an easy way for node authors to set local and global state, but in a functional way - you can pass your own map as the global state, and do whatever you want with it. It's not properly documented yet, but here's the code - https://github.com/flydelabs/flyde/blob/main/core/src/execut...

Run the following command:git clone https://github.com/FlydeHQ/flyde-discord-bot-boilerplate.git

Second this.

Reference for anyone looking I to it: https://c4model.com/

There is also quite a lot of options for helping create these diagrams. I've found https://structurizr.com/ to be the best of what I've tried so far.

What you are describing sounds a lot like C4: https://c4model.com/

The C4 model [0] provides a mostly sensible structure and techniques for representing pure software systems across different abstraction levels.

For systems involving software and hardware, or other complex interfacing (both technology and bureaucracy) this starts to delve into the universe of systems engineering. There's a decent assembly of knowledge on that in the SEBoK [1].

As another commenter has already called out too, one of the most valuable sources of information is also _why_ a system is in its current form and _how_ that's changed over time. ADR's [2] really do a good job at nailing this for just about any scale.

[0]: https://c4model.com

[1]: https://sebokwiki.org

[2]: https://adr.github.io

There a various standards for documenting software architecture, like arc42 or C4. While useful and somewhat well-known (there is certainly a correlation here), here architecture documentation can be further simplified, particularly due to the self-similarity of project and component. Following is a small template, that can also serve as a project's and component's README:

I would suggest that if your architecture diagrams are a bunch of icons provided by AWS/Azure/GCP with lines pointing at each other... you are doing it wrong.

The 'what does this box do for my system' is vastly more important than the 'which in vogue offering from my cloud provider implements it'.

I highly suggest folks take a look at the C4 Model: https://c4model.com/

We often use abstractions in software engineering to communicate complex architectures and software systems. In this article, we’ll discuss how abstractions are inherently hierarchical and how the C4 model provides a nested structure for defining your software architecture. We’ll then cover how IcePanel allows you to create interactive and zoomable diagrams for your audience to zoom in and out of different levels of technical detail.

You probably want https://c4model.com/ which explains what a C4 architecture diagram is. (See the first footnote in the article.)