> In a framework, unlike in libraries or in standard user applications, the overall program's flow of control is not dictated by the caller, but by the framework.
> In other words, users can extend the framework, but cannot modify its code.
He is talking about a specific kind of framework, not about every library under the sun. And for those he may well be right.
Back when Unity was new, most games done with it kinda looked the same. I don't know if Unity evolved to allow more control/customization or people are just better at working around it now.
And if you browse the web, you eventually run into a bunch of sites that all kinda look the same and act the same. Again, this is due to the framework imposing their way to do things instead of the developers/designers deciding it. I suppose an experienced web dev could actually recognize what framework a site like that is done on without looking at the source code, just based on behaviour.
This may be good for cheap one offs but not so much long term indeed.
> In other words, users can extend the framework, but cannot modify its code.
He is talking about a specific kind of framework, not about every library under the sun. And for those he may well be right.
Back when Unity was new, most games done with it kinda looked the same. I don't know if Unity evolved to allow more control/customization or people are just better at working around it now.
And if you browse the web, you eventually run into a bunch of sites that all kinda look the same and act the same. Again, this is due to the framework imposing their way to do things instead of the developers/designers deciding it. I suppose an experienced web dev could actually recognize what framework a site like that is done on without looking at the source code, just based on behaviour.
This may be good for cheap one offs but not so much long term indeed.