4 ms·
I find a lot of libraries don’t make the underlying systems easier to use per se, they just map a lot of use cases to configuration instead of code. I would rat
by klysm 5y ago
I find a lot of libraries don’t make the underlying systems easier to use per se, they just map a lot of use cases to configuration instead of code. I would rather just use the code hiding behind that static configuration.
- Waterluvian 5y agoAfter years and years of production experience with thousands of mobile robots that use this weird xml + yaml as configuration, I am 100% in the “just use code as configuration” camp.
- smitty1e 5y agoI put stuff in config.py Then I just `import` at will. The need for a separate configuration format was what, again?
- Waterluvian 5y agoMy probably wrong belief is that it was a misguided but noble idea of abstracting complexity.
- gedy 5y agoCompiled languages had a harder time with this.
- jacobsenscott 5y agoEven with interpreted languages - if your configuration is in code you still need to wait for a code review, wait for CI to pass, and wait for the deploy. It can easily take over an hour to do a simple configuration change.
- Too 5y agoDepends how you deploy it. Python can import a file located anywhere you want, either by changing PYTHONPATH or using importlib. And vice versa an xml-config file might be placed in the repo and going through code review. Code review for config changes is a good practice in either case, see gitops and config as code.
- Waterluvian 5y agoYou say it like any of that is a bad thing. Generally speaking, I think configuration changes should be reviewed.