It's all in the books. Gang of Four, etc. Learn from good books instead of bloggers who have a type called "Backend" and make brilliant discoveries that DI and nominal typibg are bad despite the whole industry using them successfully.
No worries, I've read the usual suspects. Taking your example of Gang of Four though (and this applies similarly to the other usual suspects), it definitely does not discuss this observation (and potential trade offs), given it predates common use of structural type systems by far.
I think as professional engineers it behooves us well to prefer actual argument and exposition of engineering tradeoffs over authority ("whole industry does it", "learn from good books").
> I think as professional engineers it behooves us well to prefer actual argument and exposition of engineering tradeoffs over authority ("whole industry does it", "learn from good books").
That really depends on what you want to achieve. e.g. if you want to retain the possibility to fire a whole team and replace it with newcomers, or external contractors, at any point in the development cycle, it is muuuuch safer to stick to what is taught in most schools (which is "tradtional OOP").
