Comparison Table: Hexagonal Architecture vs Traditional Layered Architecture

Comparison Table: Hexagonal Architecture vs Traditional Layered Architecture.md

Criteria	Traditional Layered Architecture	Hexagonal Architecture
Complexity	Simpler, with fewer moving parts and easier to understand and implement	More complex, with more moving parts and more nuanced design
Coupling	Tight coupling between layers	Loose coupling between layers, with the application layer being the main entry point for external inputs
Flexibility	Inflexible, as changes to one layer can affect other layers	More flexible, as changes to one layer do not affect other layers
Focus	Separation of concerns within the application	Separation of concerns between the application and the external world
Layers	Fixed set of layers	Flexible set of layers that can be added or removed as needed
Maintenance	More difficult to modify and extend, as changes to one layer can affect other layers	Easier to modify and extend, as the separation of concerns and use of adapters and ports make it easier to modify the application
Responsibilities	Each layer has a specific responsibility	Domain layer responsible for business logic, application layer responsible for handling user input and output
Scalability	Difficult to add new adapters or ports without affecting the core domain logic	Easier to add new adapters and ports, as they can be added without affecting the existing architecture
Testability	Difficult to test individual layers in isolation	Easier to test individual layers in isolation, as adapters and ports can be mocked or stubbed