Developing with high-code or low-code? The differences are immense. Or are they not?

The stereotypical image of the developer who sits silently in his attic tapping out code, head tucked under headphones, is disappearing. The rise of no-code and low-code platforms requires a completely different role for developers. The differences between high-code and low -code seem life-size, but is that really the case? Jeroen Verhagen works as a low-code developer, but also has years of experience with high-code. He explains when which solutions are most suitable.

Standard software packages are losing popularity. Organizations are increasingly opting for customized applications to make business processes more efficient, and more user-friendly. There are a large number of platforms available for developing such applications, divided into no-code platforms, low-code platforms and high-code platforms. But what are the differences for developers?

Steep learning curve

The entry level and speed of low-code platforms are often cited as the benefits of programming. “If you build an application in Mendix, as we do, new people, who have no experience, can quickly get on board,” says Jeroen Verhagen, low-code developer at Ciphix. “Low-code is relatively quick to learn, so you can also quickly bring the team on the client’s side into the development. Developing the same kind of application in high-code becomes more difficult, because there the learning curve is much longer. It takes much longer before an inexperienced developer can fully participate in programming. That’s an important difference, though.”

The speed of low-code proved itself over the past year. During the corona pandemic, the Mendix platform proved to be a crucial technology for companies that wanted to quickly adapt to enable remote working and better communicate with customers by setting up digital interaction channels. In fact, Mendix promotes collaboration between IT and the business because working on the platform is understandable even to people who have little programming experience. Because the amount of code is limited – it is already in the ready-made building blocks that the platforms use – a low-code platform can often be used to develop a functioning application within just a few weeks.

Fewer bugs in low code

Although the words “high” and “low” suggest a contrast, the differences are not enormous, Verhagen believes. There are plenty of similarities. Mendix has an app store, for example, from which developers can pick components to build an application. But .NET developers also have access to a library full of tools and widgets; that is not the big difference. “The advantage of low-code is that it does draw heavily on existing widgets and building blocks. Those have been tested and proven, and that automatically means fewer bugs. High-code solutions involve more deviation from standards. If you build something completely new with that, the chance of errors is also greater,” Verhagen says.

Which is not to say that low-code applications are simpler. Often, an application must interface with more static CRM or ERP systems, so the new application is expected to have a lot of flexibility to adapt processes on a regular basis.

Further proof that high- and low-code are not two separate worlds; they go together just fine. On Mendix, for example, it is perfectly possible to develop new modules in which components are coded in Java. After all, Mendix is and open platform. By working in high-code, you can again create a low-code building block, which another low-coder can in turn use for his application.

All the same cap

High-code platforms are certainly suitable for developing custom applications. However, experienced developers are then a requirement. Someone with basic knowledge can quickly be called upon to build Mendix applications, while in a high-code environment an inexperienced person can destroy more than he can contribute. Verhagen: “The learning curve is steep with Mendix, which is an advantage. But that doesn’t mean that you can’t make poorly functioning apps here just as well.”

Unlike low-code, everyone on a high-code team has their own hat. For example, such a team consists of a functional consultant, a back end developer, a database specialist and a network administrator. In Mendix projects, it is common for everyone to wear all those hats. Verhagen: “There are preferences, of course. If someone has a penchant for user interface design, that person will gravitate more toward that, but basically everyone can do everything. It is one scrum team, all members with the same role, only the level of experience will differ. Before, one team leader would talk to the customer, and the developers would just clone code. Now everyone communicates a lot, to keep the process going and the momentum going. In principle, this way of working would also work for high-code teams, but in practice it hardly ever happens.”

So when do you choose low-code?

Low-code platforms like Mendix are known for their speed of development, but that speed is relative, Verhagen believes. “If the starting point is the same, then you can say that low-code is indeed faster. But a very experienced high code team can also work at lightning speed, especially compared to inexperienced low coders. Take that consideration into account.”

Low-code can provide speed leading up to a project, though. With Mendix Studio – formerly the Web Modeler – inexperienced developers or business people can easily create a mock-up, through a few clicks. The building blocks are great for this purpose; there is no high-code involved.

If a business department has ideas, they can quickly shape them themselves, and then the Mendix scrum team can move forward with them to build a high-quality and secure application. By visualizing an application idea early on, the team quickly knows what is expected. This allows faster switching.”

Complexity of an application is no longer an issue for low-code platforms these days. When these platforms were developed a few years ago, they mainly sought the simpler solutions, but nowadays the app stores are very well stocked with all kinds of complex building blocks, modules and widgets, so the capabilities can compete with high code solutions. And, as mentioned, low code goes well with high code add-ons.

In conclusion, Verhagen believes that low code has a bright future; developments on these platforms continue to be rapid, which means that the comparison with high code solutions is increasingly in favor of low code. “Ultimately, a customer chooses a solution to his question; he does not initially choose a platform. But the benefits of working agile, as we do, ensures that solutions are built well, quickly and in concert. And that’s what you ultimately want.”

Also read our piece on the key differences about Low-Code vs. High-Code.