You are taking the article argument too literally. They meant microservices also in the sense of microlibraries, etc, not strictly a HTTP service.

▲

iainmerrick 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, I think you’re not reading it literally enough. “Microservices” generally does mean separate HTTP (or at least RPC) servers. Near the beginning, the article says:

A microservice has a very well-defined surface area. Everything that flows into the service (requests) and out (responses, webhooks)

	▲	mexicocitinluez an hour ago \| parent [-]
		I think a better word would have been "modularization" than "microservices" as I also highly correlate "microservices" with http-based calls.

▲

benfortuna 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why arbitrarily invent new meanings (for microservices) and new words (microlibraries) when there are already many adequate ways to describe modular, componentized architecures?

A totally valid and important point but it has been diluted by talking about microservices rather than importance of modular architectures for agent-based coding.

	▲	mexicocitinluez an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> describe modular, Agreed. Modular is what they were probably after.