Background: I am working on a service where the domain logic exists as a library, and then the actual executable is built on a web framework as a wrapper around the domain logic library. There is no guarantee two customers run the same version of this service.

Task: I was asked to create a way to print the schema for representing a subcomponent of the domain logic.

My solution: I implemented this as a command-line flag to the service executable. I.e. if you pass --dump-schema X when running the service, it will just dump the expected schema of X and then quit. If you don't pass any flags, it will instead print nothing but start accepting requests as usual.

Rationale: I did it this way to ensure the output of the schema dump stays in sync with what the actual service will expect when run from the same binary. Additionally, it is my personal belief that if a request to the service makes sense as a one-shot command-line invocation, then it's rarely a bad idea to allow that.

Review comments: When discussing with a senior team member, they argued that the whole command-line flag thing is a step away from how they've done things before – and might be confusing as a result. He'd prefer if there was a separate executable dump_schema which issued the command.

Counter-argument: I can understand the argument; they're a Microsoft/Windows shop, so the CLI is not how they naturally interact with their computers. However, they're slowly moving over to a Linux/Unix environment, so that's sort of a moot point, in my opinion.

My hesitation: However, thinking about it, I realise I don't have any strong arguments as to whether either approach (CLI flag or separate executable) would be preferable. They amount to pretty much the same thing, except one multiplexes in the main procedure, and the other in the shell.

So is there any chance you geniuses are able to contrast and compare the two approaches? Or is it truly a wash?

  • 2
    Even in Windows, interacting with the command line is very common so I find the senior team member's comment odd. If he/she really pushes on it, create a dump_schema batch file that just calls the original exe with the arguments :P.
    – 17 of 26
    Nov 5, 2018 at 23:36

1 Answer 1


Don't go with separate executables if it means duplicating stuff that now has to be kept in sync. If anything create different "front ends" to access it.

I've solved exactly this problem by offering a windows shortcut that has the command line option in it.

  • Thanks! Either way, there is no code duplication involved. In fact, it's almost silly how little the solutions differ from each other. The only difference is whether one or two build artifacts are created from the code. But your answer also made me realise that two executables means there will be duplication when copying over build artifacts to production systems and if e.g. one executable is overwritten while the other isn't, that may have bad consequences. So I'll go with one executable and CLI flags. Thank you again!
    – kqr
    Nov 6, 2018 at 14:29

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.