It will happen to you (programming.dev)
🀣 1
 

top 34 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 67 points 5 months ago (11 children)

It's the configuration complexity clock.

You hardcode values in an established, full-featured programming language.

That gets annoying, so you push some into config files.

That's not powerful enough, so you let the config files include conditionals.

Soon your config files are more like scripts, but it's so easy to keep adding features...

And suddenly you're back to hardcoding, but in a newer, jankier programming language.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    That's not powerful enough, so you let the config files include conditionals.

    NOPE! Nope. That's the too far point. Abort. Abandon ship. Start over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Grug make thinky box do good.

    Grug too dumb to understand impossible.

    Peers say server too weak for search. Grug write custom search. Customer happy. Boss happy. Peers say it fail edge case. Grug shrug.

    Peers say web app can't use CLI tool. Grug make extension. Customers happy. Boss happy. Peers say that cheating. Grug too dumb for rules.

    Grug code small. Get used lots. Peers code big. Argue about reviews. Never get deployed.

    Grug strongest there is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    "Grug too dumb for rules" is legitimately good programming advice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Only sort of related but this reminded me of something that struck me recently:

    A great benefit of being dumb is never knowing something was too obvious to be worth logic

    Often in comedies, there will be a scene where the dummy helps the genius reach some epiphany just by applying simple reasoning to a point the genius glossed over

    I think this is pretty realistic

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    So this is exactly talking about Nix, Guix, chezmoi?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    Don't know about chezmoi, but Nix and Guix use a proper programming language that is also suited as a configuration file format, no?

    So they're at noon and might just stay there

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    Ok I'm inferring here, but why does DSL mean more than one thing in the technology/computer field? The only one I know is Digital Subscriber Line

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    The one I'm familiar with is "Domain Specific Language"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    Because every three letter acronym means more than one thing. There are only 17 576 TLA so they are going to be heavily duplicated.

    You should almost always spell out acronyms on the first use.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago*

    I'm puzzled too. In DSL the "local loop" is the wiring between your house and the nearest central office or concentrator. Kind of like "last mile" but more like "last block or two". So I don't get what "adding loops" would mean.

    Besides Domain Specific Language which somebody else refers to in the thread, DSL can also mean Damn Small Linux. Still no clue about adding loops.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 17 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    I have created a handful of DSLs over the years and I think most of them were bad ideas. Ironically the most complex one is the one that I think was actually right. It had support for a lot of stuff like loops, functions, custom variables and even some weird shit like async execution of child commands.

    I think what made it work in that case was mostly that the purpose of the DSL was completely different from the others. The system wasn't designed with a DSL in mind. The DSL was just a simpler way to provide input for something that was already there.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    Exactly! Making a DSL and using it like a programming language introduces necessities that will not be considered as throughly if they where added to a "real" language.

    I once wanted a DSL for a calendar program I was making (so the user could define complex events and stuff). So I made a simple programming language that could be embedded in the program, kinda like how lua is commonly used.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    Your DSL isn't embedded on a Turing complete language. That was your mistake.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    So... How about Conway's life for DSL?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    If your DSL has loops tyen it should be a Python library

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)