Global Architecture

Front-end applications can be structured in a variety of architectural styles, each with its own strengths and trade-offs. Choosing the right architecture depends on factors like project size, team structure, scalability needs, and maintainability requirements. Below are some of the most common global architectural patterns in front-end development:

Monolithic Architecture

A monolithic architecture organizes the entire application as a single, unified codebase. All features, components, and logic are tightly coupled and deployed together. This approach is simple to start with and works well for small projects or prototypes. However, as the application grows, it can become difficult to maintain, scale, and onboard new team members due to tight coupling and lack of modularity.

The repository structure we are using in this course is an example of a monolithic architecture. All code is organized in a single repository, and all features are developed and deployed together.

Pros:

• Simple setup and deployment
• Easier to manage for small teams and projects

Cons:

• Harder to scale and maintain as the codebase grows
• Difficult to isolate and update features independently

Modular Architecture

In a modular architecture, the application is divided into distinct modules, each responsible for a specific feature or domain. Modules communicate through well-defined interfaces, making it easier to develop, test, and maintain features independently. This structure improves scalability and supports parallel development by multiple teams.

Take for instance the extensions of visual studio code. Each extension is a self-contained module that can be developed, tested, and deployed independently. This allows for greater flexibility and scalability, as teams can work on different extensions without interfering with each other.

Pros:

• Better separation of concerns
• Easier to scale and maintain
• Supports parallel development

Cons:

• Requires careful planning of module boundaries and interfaces
• Slightly more complex build and deployment processes

---

Component-Based Architecture

Component-based architecture is the foundation of modern front-end frameworks like React, Vue, and Angular. The UI is built from small, reusable components that encapsulate their own structure, style, and behavior. Components can be composed to create complex interfaces, promoting reusability and maintainability.

This architecture aligns well with the principles of atomic design, where components are categorized into atoms, molecules, organisms, templates, and pages. Each component can be developed and tested independently, making it easier to manage large applications.

Pros:

• High reusability and encapsulation
• Easier to test and maintain
• Supports rapid UI development

Cons:

• Can lead to deeply nested component trees
• Requires discipline to avoid duplicating logic across components

Microfrontend Architecture

Microfrontend architecture extends the concept of microservices to the front end. The application is split into independent, self-contained microfrontends, each owned by different teams and responsible for a specific business domain. Microfrontends can be developed, deployed, and updated independently, enabling large organizations to scale their front-end development.

In an application that is built using microfrontends, you might encounter a section of the application that is built using React, while another section is built using Vue. Each section can be developed and deployed independently, allowing teams to choose the best technology for their specific needs.

Pros:

• Enables independent development and deployment
• Scales well for large teams and complex applications
• Allows technology diversity across teams

Cons:

• Increased complexity in integration and communication
• Potential for inconsistent user experience if not coordinated

Flux Architecture

Flux is an architectural pattern for managing state in front-end applications, popularized by React and libraries like Redux. It enforces a unidirectional data flow: actions trigger updates to a central store, which then updates the UI. This makes state changes predictable and easier to debug.

Pros:

• Predictable state management
• Easier to debug and test
• Encourages clear separation of concerns

Cons:

• Can introduce boilerplate code
• May be overkill for simple applications

Hybrid / Mixed Architecture

Many real-world applications use a hybrid approach, combining elements from multiple architectural patterns to suit their needs. In our course, we will for instance combine the monolithic architecture of the repository with a modular architecture for the features, and a component-based architecture for the UI. This allows us to leverage the strengths of each pattern while mitigating their weaknesses.

---

Sources

• Modern Frontend Architecture Pattern

---

Home	Architectural Patterns
Architecture	Challenges