5 ms·

I've consumed the kinds of APIs you're referencing and they are my least favorite. I would prefer a poorly documented API over one that returns me 15 IDs that I

I've consumed the kinds of APIs you're referencing and they are my least favorite. I would prefer a poorly documented API over one that returns me 15 IDs that I must look up in separate calls. I think there's a reason those APIs also tend to have rate limits that are way too low to be useful.

iratewizard 5y ago
- runarberg 5y ago
  I would rather you not assigning hate to the entirety of autistic developers. There are plenty of autistic developers who are fully capable of designing great APIs with awesome usability. Being autistic has nothing to do with how APIs are developed.
  - iratewizard 5y ago
synthmeat 5y ago
We're querying dozens, if not into hundreds, of GraphQL APIs for a couple of years now. Terrible DX, terrible performance, terrible uptimes. Everyone on the team, with no exception, hates them. Even a lot of those who produce them cobble together a bad REST implementation for parts of their own products. Agreed even at rate limits comment - frequently, probably in moments of desperation, they rate limit according to Host header to keep their own products up and working.
- RedShift1 5y ago
  > Terrible DX Can you elaborate what's terrible about the developer experience? If anything it's much better than REST, even if the developer of the API doesn't bother with documentation, the GraphQL schema is fully usable as documentation. Plus the way to input and output data into the API is standardized and the same across all GraphQL API's. > terrible performance How? Is the API slow to respond? Or are you making too many calls (which you shouldn't do) increasing the round trip time? > terrible uptimes I fail to see how that uptime is related to GraphQL. REST API's can be just as unreliable, if the server is down, the server is down and no technology can fix that.

5 ms·

I've consumed the kinds of APIs you're referencing and they are my least favorite. I would prefer a poorly documented API over one that returns me 15 IDs that I

by JaggedJax 5y ago

iratewizard 5y ago
- runarberg 5y ago
  I would rather you not assigning hate to the entirety of autistic developers. There are plenty of autistic developers who are fully capable of designing great APIs with awesome usability. Being autistic has nothing to do with how APIs are developed.
  - iratewizard 5y ago
synthmeat 5y ago
We're querying dozens, if not into hundreds, of GraphQL APIs for a couple of years now. Terrible DX, terrible performance, terrible uptimes. Everyone on the team, with no exception, hates them. Even a lot of those who produce them cobble together a bad REST implementation for parts of their own products. Agreed even at rate limits comment - frequently, probably in moments of desperation, they rate limit according to Host header to keep their own products up and working.
- RedShift1 5y ago
  > Terrible DX Can you elaborate what's terrible about the developer experience? If anything it's much better than REST, even if the developer of the API doesn't bother with documentation, the GraphQL schema is fully usable as documentation. Plus the way to input and output data into the API is standardized and the same across all GraphQL API's. > terrible performance How? Is the API slow to respond? Or are you making too many calls (which you shouldn't do) increasing the round trip time? > terrible uptimes I fail to see how that uptime is related to GraphQL. REST API's can be just as unreliable, if the server is down, the server is down and no technology can fix that.