Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Simpler is better: Complex problems require complex solutions, but we should strive for simplicity in our software. Code is a liability—less code is less that could go wrong, and less to debug when things do go wrong!

This seems to confuse complexity with features. If a library has 100k lines of code but the parts you use are only 1k lines of code then why is that worse than a library with 1k lines of code?

> I want a single HTTPS connection. I don’t need persistent sessions with connection pools and cookies. I don’t need an async runtime.2 I need a glass of scotch, a socket, and a few syscalls. In the same vein,

That's true right until the moment you do need them and then you need to rewrite a lot of code. Especially great fun when the thing you're connecting to assumes everyone has this feature and you spend hours or days debugging things.

Modular, popular and well structured libraries with all the features one might reasonably need are my preference. Minimalism in lines of code is as much a trap as a minimalism in benchmark performance.



> If a library has 100k lines of code but the parts you use are only 1k lines of code then why is that worse than a library with 1k lines of code?

There's nothing wrong with not using the whole feature set of some library. But if library A does the same things as library B with a third of the code, isn't that better? (All other things - e.g. perf - being equal)

> That's true right until the moment you do need them and then you need to rewrite a lot of code.

There's plenty of applications that will only ever need a handful of connections. Probably most applications.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: