I don't think 9K is "large" for an application. At all.
I don't think 9K is "large" for an application. At all.
Because there is so little boiler-plate code that is being written, the utility-density of such a codebase can be extraordinarily high. 9,000 lines of PHP could amount to very little utility but when well-architected, there is a crazy amount that can be done with even 2,000 lines of a framework such as Angular or Rails.
[EDIT]
The point I'm making is that a good developer working in harmony with a framework can do in 4 very readable lines what a less experienced developer might easily expand to 60 lines. As such dismissing a 15k codebase as "small" is somewhat naive. A 15k Angular app can do a vast amount.
My experience with Rails (and my limited experience with Angular suggests it's similar) is that working harmoniously with the framework gives you massive amounts of utility with very, very few lines of code. I've personally refactored 100 line controllers from junior developers down to 12 lines. It might feel macho to compare codebase sizes but there's no strong coupling to utility (arguably perhaps the reverse).
You can certainly write 60k apps in Rails, Angular or Django but dismissing a 15k app as "small" doesn't do justice to the utility that even such a "small" codebase can deliver.
...sorry this comment was so long I didn't have time to write a short one ;)
The problem is, it's not always obvious what "the Angular way" is, but on the plus side, I've just thought of a title for a series of blog posts...
- Django - 215,000 LOC (.py)
- Ruby - 232,000 LOC (.rb)
- CakePHP - 240,000 LOC (.php)
$ find . -name '*.rb' | xargs wc -l | tail -1
232424 total
Maybe I should have said LOCC (lines of commented code)?
Interesting claim. Do you have references?
(An account with a couple of hundreds of Karma making extreme claims? Please surprise me by not being a troll. :-) )
It could probably be rewritten down to about 10-20K lines (maybe less) if I had a spare month or two.
Assuming one uses all the features of a framework, the total complexity of my 24K line framework application (counting only code I've written) could be compared to that of a 321K line non-framework application (counting all the code in my project).
Thankfully I only have to write/maintain 8% of the codebase, as the remaining 92% is kept up-to-date by typing `composer update` on a weekly basis.
There is a lot of code in there that is really "framework" but it's completely baked into everything else so not really separable. There's probably at least 2 different and distinct attempts at creating a framework, and you can tell the age of the code by which it uses.
The main reason it hasn't been significantly refactored is that it is astonishingly reliable considering how bad the code is.
For comparison, I work on a Backbone.js app that has the following distribution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Javascript 282 4348 7356 27860
CoffeeScript 336 4953 1687 17939
Obviously Backbone.js has much less "batteries" included.The tips in the article were good and well thought out. I appreciate the effort the author made.
Of course, if we are treating size as absolute, and basing it on lines of code, then 9k is pretty small. I mean linux has like 15m lines! It will take a while to catch up.
However, right now it works quite well since I'm using "editor folds" to separate each controller.
For a C++ or Java code that 9K would probably make it into the "small" category.