Low-code: pitfalls
Despite its seemingly obvious advantages, low-code has yet to become a mass technology. And there are reasons for this:
Limitations, boundaries, and conditions that pre-written code fragments dictate to businesses. By using a specific low-code service, a company automatically becomes dependent on the vendor. That is, an organization that regularly uses the services of a low-code platform cannot independently manage product or technical changes, but is entirely dependent on what the platform creators come up with.
The potential threat of an error, malfunction, or even the closure and departure of one or another low-code platform from the market - because of this, all processes may fall off at one point, and the business will come to an end.
The quality of the code itself, on which security directly depends. As a rule, low-code always raises questions among security system employees - since the qualifications of ordinary employees may not be sufficient to competently manage the system built by developers.
Lack of refactoring capabilities. Some cubes, of course, allow you to write code inside, but you won't be able to test it quickly. You need to conduct large-scale (and expensive) tests - after all, when visual images and pieces of code get mixed up, it leads to a lot of confusion. And a seemingly convenient low-code tool turns into a headache.
Updates that can cause difficulties for untrained employees. When the system needs changes - and they will sooner or later - you won't be able to do without professionals. At the same time, updates still depend on the low-code platform itself.
For example, if the developer includes backward austria telegram database compatibility, then updates do not cause any difficulties at all - the system transforms the data under the hood on its own, and everything works fine. At the same time, it happens that for an update it is necessary to change the data storage format. Then it is necessary to write migration scripts or make a choice in favor of smooth transformation.
As for the fantasy that low-code platforms will eventually leave developers without tasks and work - this is just a fantasy. At least because someone has to develop the low-code systems themselves.
In addition, there is a fine line between convenient development tools and the dubious concept of making changes to the system without qualified specialists in order to save money.
Read on the topic: No-code in HR: how it works and what kind of business it is suitable for
Today, low-code is a convenient tool in the hands of professionals. It allows not only to enjoy work, spend time and effort on solving interesting problems, but also to quickly create services for business, as well as optimize processes using ready-made cubes with scenarios. That is, it allows developers to focus on really important tasks.
It turns out that low-code is, first and foremost, a story about the work of a programmer, his labor and optimization of processes. And also a trend in the IT sphere: from year to year, the process of creating IT products becomes simpler, and less code is used. Hence the logical name: "less code".
Low-code definitely has a future. Low-code platforms have already firmly occupied their niche and are actively developing towards business. But there are also limitations that need to be worked with very carefully. And the topic itself needs to be studied more deeply: understand all the existing limitations and disadvantages and take only the advantages.
For this reason, the main users of low-code should be the developers themselves, who will find an adequate way to quickly make changes to the code, rather than spending a lot of time and money on large-scale testing.