MENU
"Spaghetti Architecture" is also known as 'tightly coupled architecture' or 'brittle architecture'. Which is NOT a reason why is "Spaghetti Architecture" bad?
Suggested Answer: C
Get Premium Architecture-Specialist-11 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
12 comments · newest first
OZ
Ozell
2 months ago
Definitely C. If it's easy to change, it's not spaghetti!
LU
Ludivina
2 months ago
Agreed! C makes sense. Spaghetti architecture isn't maintainable.
JE
Jettie
2 months ago
I think C is the answer. Changes should be easy to deploy.
GE
Geraldine
3 months ago
Are we sure C is maintainable? Sounds too good to be true!
KE
Keneth
3 months ago
A and B are super valid reasons, but C just doesn't fit.
JA
Jackie
3 months ago
Wow, I didn't know it was also called brittle architecture!
ME
Merissa
3 months ago
I disagree, any change can be a headache in spaghetti architecture.
CA
Catina
3 months ago
C is definitely the right answer!
SH
Shawana
3 months ago
I’m leaning towards C being the answer, but I’m not completely confident. It just seems too optimistic for spaghetti architecture.
MA
Margret
4 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I think B makes sense too. If it's hard to manage, that sounds like a problem.
RI
Ricki
4 months ago
I feel like I’ve seen a similar question before, and I think C is the one that doesn’t fit. Changes should be hard in spaghetti architecture, right?
TW
Twana
4 months ago
I remember studying about how tightly coupled systems can lead to cascading failures, so I think A is definitely a reason why it's bad.