3 ms·
I do not think imperative languages are better, because they suck at parallelization. And creating infrastructure elements in parallel is crucial. What I see a
by adontz 8y ago
I do not think imperative languages are better, because they suck at parallelization. And creating infrastructure elements in parallel is crucial.
What I see as optimal is tool like make, which calls other command line tools. Resolves dependencies, processes errors. But not make, something with sane syntax and error handling.
All these new fancy all-Go tools creep me out. Infrastructure tooling should not live in domain of one programming language. Extensibility should be language agnostic. If I want to write some Perl/Python/Bash script to support some very non standard part of my infrastructure, I should be able to. If I want to plug vendor specific utility execution into deployment pipeline, I should be able to. And it should be easy.
- mdaniel 8y ago> All these new fancy all-Go tools creep me out. It certainly makes one's ability to look into the machinery and know what is going on much harder. > If I want to write some Perl/Python/Bash script to support some very non standard part of my infrastructure, I should be able to That very feature is why I love ansible: if there is some quirk, or even an unreleased module (they only ship new features in major releases, I recently learned), then you can copy the upstream file, or a modified version of the existing one, or even a whole new module, into the `library` or `lookup_plugins` directory of your playbook and you're back in business. No fighting with golang anything. You can also write ansible modules in any language you like.