I'll be honest. I hated it. Any book that contains the text "obviously ..." loses my trust. I can't respect an author who's too lazy to make his point.
He used it quite a few times in the beginning of the book.
"Obviously" is used for two reasons. Derision, or to escape criticism.
I'm obviously right.
Now the real critique. The book assumes experts are on hand to ask, and that terms don't change. I worked at a place where what we called user changed 3 times in 4 years. Runners/workers/producers. You would know when a bit of code was written based on the names for users in the api.
It also assumes that all experts agree. I worked on an education app where teachers in schools were the experts. Different schools in the same city had different terms for the same thing. So which expert do you trust.
Is it a trunk or a boot? Is it an elevator or a lift? And that's if you're writing an app for english only speaking experts.
Finally, we have to understand the mind of the dev, to know how they organised their walls. The dev that left the company 5 years ago.
It's a nice system but far too complicated for the world we live in, where most tech companies, especially banks, are filled with imported labor or outsourced globally.
DDD requires a certain discipline and dedication I just haven't seen in my career across many companies.
Good luck getting more than a handful of people to not only digest the big books but also structure all their code and company around practicing it.
