Talk:Software framework

I replaced this:

A software framework is a reusable design for a software system (or subsystem). This is expressed as a set of abstract classes and the way their instances collaborate for a specific type of software.^[1][2]

With a version of the first few sentences of this:

Which is infinitely easier to understand.

Trav (talk) 14:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Travb. Your concern about the old definition is warranted. I've replaced it with a definition that is agreed to by the academic community and cited two of their experts (Ralph Johnson and Dirk Riehle). It is important to describe both the similarities to and differences from code libraries, and the new intro paragraph does this too. I have good intentions of making more cleanups on this article. I'm fairly expert in this area myself -- I have a phd in software engineering from CMU and wrote my dissertation on a new technique to specify software frameworks. Regards, George. Georgefairbanks (talk) 00:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The first paragraph as it stands now is still a mess! A software framework is not an abstraction, it is a set of software libraries and perhaps accompanying tools implementing an abstraction. As it stands the text is inconsistent about this. The specific properties mentioned (such as IoC) are not necessary properties of frameworks in general. Rp (talk) 10:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Why is a software framework related only to web development? It´s what one understands from the introduction:

"The idea is that all of the tedious, low-level details of creating a web application are already in a reusable package. For a web developer, this means you can spend your time worrying about specific problems related to your application, and not the actual building of the code behind it."

I thought a software framework was independent of the application (web, desktop, etc.) for example MFC is a software framework not intended for web development.

Deleting the "web" word in that paragraph.

Avargasm (talk) 20:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe it is important not to use the word framework about whatever. Alot of re-usable code for web development isnt a framework simple snippets or some of them libraries. The word should be used with care. I believe it is good to start a topic about "Frameworks compared to libraries" so that it can be established that a framework - in my opinion and others - is bigger than just a file or 2. API's are framworks. I believe there is no such thing as CSS frameworks for instance. In software development i believe there are more frameworks than in web development, but the distinction is important to help avoid the confusion that all these discussions are about. --wmasterj (talk) 22:26, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

nmb

Microsoft calls .Net a framework. I think that is wrong. Microsoft is really bad about the terminology they use, so much so as to seem arrogant. Sam Tomato (talk) 18:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

So when you say "re-usable code for web development" I assume you are primarily referring to .Net and I agree that ".Net Framework" is wrong. Sam Tomato (talk) 18:10, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The difference between a library and a framework is that a framework implements inversion of control (the Hollywood Principle - Don't call us, we'll call you). When using a library you have to write code to call its components, but when using a framework it has components which call the code that you write. This is achieved by using the Template Method Pattern where an abstract class containing default behaviour is provided by the framework and a subclass provides custom behaviour. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonymarston (talk • contribs) 10:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I noticed on the entry for Callback (computer programming); there is no mention of frameworks there . and on this page, Callback is not identified as being the functions used by the Hollywood_Principle . (that use may be specific to Microsoft culture). http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en/clr/thread/7711d8de-68e8-4644-b10b-252f55528bed Wikipaddn (talk) 03:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The text "unless the software is a compiler-object linker" doesn't make sense to me. Is it possible the author meant "uses a" instead of "is a"? And does "wholly controlled" mean independent? SandStone (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I assume that a framework is a frame. I think that that should be stated explicitly and the definition should be built upon that. A framework is something that other software is built upon and that holds the software together. Sam Tomato (talk) 18:08, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

with respect, i think your assumption is not correct. The word frame in the software development context most commonly refers to a graphic component used in a UI definition, or is used when describing the time frame applicable to an objects existance in a system or other such abstract "discussions". I will happily agree with your contention if you could please expand a bit on what you mean?

When you say "holds the software together" i think you mean "provides a structure into which application specific code is inserted" ... or something like that, yes? Just 'cause "software" is such a general term generally meaning "application" and a framework does not define an application, it just participates in its realization.

humm that this talk was last used in 2015 is a bit telling — vulcan_ (talk · contribs) 04:25, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Telling of what? ZFT (talk) 05:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

A framework is not a frame. In software or otherwise. Stevebroshar (talk) 13:30, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

It's clear that there really is no steadfast definition of software framework and the authors here are trying to create one as though this article is the source of academic truth. There are no citations that support the actual definition being proposed. For example, it declares that a framework must have "Inversion of Control". Based on what? The citation is an article that defines "inversion of control" but doesn't really cite a source as to where that even is a requirement other than in the author's own mind.

What is the origin of the term? What was the first framework? Does ANSI, ISO, or any other standards body define the term? A framework is a conceptual or physical structure. That term can be applied to software in a lot of ways. There's no real benefit to trying to create a strict definition of what can be called a software framework. If it provides some sort of structure for developing software, it can be called a software framework. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.147.229 (talk) 12:33, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree it's not appropriate for a Wikipedia article to just try to make up its own definition of the term. There is one already in Schmidt's paper, which in turn is citing another publication from 1988 also giving a definition of the term. I don't see why we can't just take those, at least as a reputable starting point. Psequeirag (talk) 02:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

This articles contains very java/OOP specific language (use of "method" over "function," references to design patterns). This may confuse readers or cause them to think that a framework is an inherently object oriented concept. ABuzzedWhaler (talk) 17:18, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

@7804j WRT your change: "Rewriting lead, to bring a combination between what I had originally and recent changes by [me]"

"in software programming" adds no value IMO. Far too many articles start with "in something". It's really only needed when the term is not unique; needs disambiguation, right? How many things in this world are called software framework? Just one. Further, computer programming seems overly specific. It's about software development. It's about software. It's about computing. Let's just drop the "in something" and let it stand alone.

It's a platform. What's a platform? You don't define the term. And I don't think it is one. Drop words that are not clearly applicable.

It's generic functionality? Hardly. I think it's very specific (non-generic) functionality.

It's an abstraction layer? No. A framework is not that. It's concrete; not abstract.

What is user code? You don't define it. It's not a common term. What user? You mean using code? as in the code that uses a library?

What is Non-modifiable core? Don't rename a link to an lesser known term. KISS

The wording you had before (apparently) and re-added is off the mark and inaccurate. Also is a bit passive and weasel worded.

FYI: The formatting like extension better supports spell checking. Without the space, the spell checker puts squiggles for the text "extension|extension". Stevebroshar (talk) 16:37, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree with you that it's better to drop "In software programming" in this particular case. I've removed it.

I don't think the word "platform" necessarily needs to be defined in the intro, but I don't have a strong opinion there so I'm happy to drop the word platform and get back to your version there.

I'm fine to stick to "Open-closed principle" if you prefer. I felt non-modifiable core was more descriptive thus easier to understand, but I have no strong feeling. I've made the edit.

However, I disagree with the following:

• "It's generic functionality? Hardly". Frameworks do provide generic, reusable functionality (HTTP handling, database access, UI components, etc.) that gets specialized for specific use cases.
• "A framework is not an abstraction layer". Frameworks do provide abstraction layers over lower-level concerns. This is core to how they work - they abstract away the complexity of things like network protocols, file systems, etc. Regarding concrete vs abstract: a framework can be a concrete implementation that provides an abstraction layer. For example, Django is concrete code, but it abstracts away HTTP handling, database operations, etc. Concrete and abstract are not mutually exclusive.
• "What is user code? You don't define it." I think it's clear from the context that we're referring to the user of the library and user of the software framework. But happy to use a different terminology if you feel it could be improved (or spelling it out more clearly, e.g., "code of the user")

7804j (talk) 14:20, 10 August 2025 (UTC)