3 ms·

I'm not against dependencies, I'm against the idea that you have to install every single one you see. I'm against poorly coded and untested dependencies. I'm ag

I'm not against dependencies, I'm against the idea that you have to install every single one you see. I'm against poorly coded and untested dependencies. I'm against the idea that a "batteries included" platform is inherently different or better than one with a widespread ecosystem of small packages. I've used (and still use!) several systems that are "batteries included". There are upsides and downsides, but the major downside is that in a "batteries included" system, it's more often than not "their way or the highway". Don't like their API for traversing XML? Well there aren't any other options. Do you need to trade off speed for correctness for something? Well you'd better hope that your blessed implementation provides the options to do that.

tonyedgecombe 8y ago
I'm against poorly coded and untested dependencies. It's not an easy problem to solve when nearly every dependency has it's own dependencies. Don't like their API for traversing XML? I don't know about other frameworks but there are a ton of options for parsing XML in .Net. Just because there is something included doesn't mean you have to use it. What we are really talking about is all the little stuff like array-flatten, a dependency in express as an example. Have you audited that package, are you sure it's written to a good standard, is the developer slipping in something you don't expect? It's unlikely you would want an alternative in .Net because the solution there is robust and well thought through.
- scarface74 8y ago
  I don't know about other frameworks but there are a ton of options for parsing XML in .Net. Just because there is something included doesn't mean you have to use it. The most popular ones are written by Microsoft and included with .Net.... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/data/xml/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/data/xml/

tonyedgecombe 8y ago

I'm against poorly coded and untested dependencies. It's not an easy problem to solve when nearly every dependency has it's own dependencies. Don't like their API for traversing XML? I don't know about other frameworks but there are a ton of options for parsing XML in .Net. Just because there is something included doesn't mean you have to use it. What we are really talking about is all the little stuff like array-flatten, a dependency in express as an example. Have you audited that package, are you sure it's written to a good standard, is the developer slipping in something you don't expect? It's unlikely you would want an alternative in .Net because the solution there is robust and well thought through.

scarface74 8y ago
I don't know about other frameworks but there are a ton of options for parsing XML in .Net. Just because there is something included doesn't mean you have to use it. The most popular ones are written by Microsoft and included with .Net.... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/data/xml/ https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/data/xml/