Pros of eShopOnContainers

• More comprehensive, covering a wider range of microservices and cloud-native patterns
• Better suited for large-scale, enterprise-level applications
• Includes containerization and orchestration with Docker and Kubernetes

Cons of eShopOnContainers

• Higher complexity, steeper learning curve for beginners
• May be overkill for smaller projects or simpler applications
• Requires more resources to run and maintain

Code Comparison

EquinoxProject (Domain-Driven Design approach):

public class Customer : Entity, IAggregateRoot
{
    public string Name { get; private set; }
    public Email Email { get; private set; }
    public bool Active { get; private set; }

    // Methods and business logic
}

eShopOnContainers (Microservices approach):

[Route("api/v1/[controller]")]
public class CatalogController : ControllerBase
{
    private readonly CatalogContext _catalogContext;
    private readonly IOptionsSnapshot<CatalogSettings> _settings;

    public CatalogController(CatalogContext context, IOptionsSnapshot<CatalogSettings> settings)
    {
        _catalogContext = context ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(context));
        _settings = settings ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(settings));
    }

    // API endpoints and actions
}

The code snippets highlight the different architectural approaches: EquinoxProject focuses on domain-driven design with rich domain models, while eShopOnContainers emphasizes microservices with API controllers and dependency injection.

Pros of CleanArchitecture

• More lightweight and focused on core clean architecture principles
• Includes a comprehensive test suite, demonstrating best practices in testing
• Provides clear separation of concerns with distinct project layers

Cons of CleanArchitecture

• Less feature-rich compared to EquinoxProject
• Doesn't include advanced patterns like CQRS or Event Sourcing
• May require additional setup for more complex applications

Code Comparison

CleanArchitecture:

public class DeleteToDoItemCommand : IRequest
{
    public int Id { get; set; }
}

public class DeleteToDoItemCommandHandler : IRequestHandler<DeleteToDoItemCommand>
{
    private readonly IRepository<ToDoItem> _repository;

    public DeleteToDoItemCommandHandler(IRepository<ToDoItem> repository)
    {
        _repository = repository;
    }
}

EquinoxProject:

public class CustomerCommandHandler : CommandHandler,
    IRequestHandler<RegisterNewCustomerCommand, ValidationResult>,
    IRequestHandler<UpdateCustomerCommand, ValidationResult>,
    IRequestHandler<RemoveCustomerCommand, ValidationResult>
{
    private readonly ICustomerRepository _customerRepository;
    private readonly IMediatorHandler _mediator;

    public CustomerCommandHandler(ICustomerRepository customerRepository,
                                  IUnitOfWork uow,
                                  IMediatorHandler mediator,
                                  INotificationHandler<DomainNotification> notifications) : base(uow, mediator, notifications)
    {
        _customerRepository = customerRepository;
        _mediator = mediator;
    }
}

Pros of modular-monolith-with-ddd

• Focuses on modular monolith architecture, which can be easier to maintain and scale compared to microservices
• Provides a more comprehensive example of Domain-Driven Design (DDD) principles
• Includes detailed documentation and architectural decision records (ADRs)

Cons of modular-monolith-with-ddd

• Less emphasis on clean architecture compared to EquinoxProject
• May be more complex for beginners due to its extensive use of DDD concepts
• Lacks some of the additional features present in EquinoxProject, such as identity management

Code Comparison

EquinoxProject (Domain Entity):

public class Customer : Entity
{
    public string Name { get; private set; }
    public string Email { get; private set; }
    public DateTime BirthDate { get; private set; }
}

modular-monolith-with-ddd (Domain Entity):

public class Meeting : Entity, IAggregateRoot
{
    public MeetingId Id { get; private set; }
    public string Title { get; private set; }
    public MeetingTerm Term { get; private set; }
    public List<MeetingAttendee> Attendees { get; private set; }
}

Both projects demonstrate the use of domain entities, but modular-monolith-with-ddd shows a more complex implementation with value objects and aggregate roots, aligning closer with DDD principles.

Pros of aspnetcore-realworld-example-app

• Implements the RealWorld specification, providing a standardized API and frontend
• Includes comprehensive API documentation using Swagger
• Utilizes AutoMapper for object-to-object mapping, simplifying data transfer

Cons of aspnetcore-realworld-example-app

• Less focus on Domain-Driven Design (DDD) principles compared to EquinoxProject
• Simpler project structure, which may be less suitable for large-scale applications
• Limited use of design patterns and architectural concepts

Code Comparison

EquinoxProject (Domain Entity):

public class Customer : Entity
{
    public Customer(Guid id, string name, string email, DateTime birthDate)
    {
        Id = id;
        Name = name;
        Email = email;
        BirthDate = birthDate;
    }
    // Properties and methods...
}

aspnetcore-realworld-example-app (Domain Entity):

public class Article
{
    public int ArticleId { get; set; }
    public string Slug { get; set; }
    public string Title { get; set; }
    public string Description { get; set; }
    public string Body { get; set; }
    // Other properties...
}

The EquinoxProject example demonstrates a more DDD-oriented approach with a constructor and encapsulation, while the aspnetcore-realworld-example-app uses a simpler POCO (Plain Old CLR Object) structure.

Pros of ContosoUniversityDotNetCore-Pages

• Simpler architecture, making it easier for beginners to understand and implement
• Focuses on Razor Pages, which can be beneficial for those specifically learning this technology
• Includes more comprehensive documentation and comments within the code

Cons of ContosoUniversityDotNetCore-Pages

• Less scalable for large, complex applications compared to EquinoxProject's DDD approach
• Lacks advanced features like CQRS and Event Sourcing found in EquinoxProject
• Does not demonstrate integration with external services or APIs

Code Comparison

ContosoUniversityDotNetCore-Pages:

public class Student
{
    public int ID { get; set; }
    public string LastName { get; set; }
    public string FirstMidName { get; set; }
    public DateTime EnrollmentDate { get; set; }
}

EquinoxProject:

public class Customer : Entity
{
    public Customer(Guid id, string name, string email, DateTime birthDate)
    {
        Id = id;
        Name = name;
        Email = email;
        BirthDate = birthDate;
    }
}

The code comparison shows that ContosoUniversityDotNetCore-Pages uses a simpler model structure, while EquinoxProject implements a more robust domain model with additional features like GUID identifiers and inheritance from a base Entity class.