4 ms·

I feel like this response is common enough that it's almost a trope. "Oh you don't like leaky abstraction X, so what we should all code in binary!?" I think i

I feel like this response is common enough that it's almost a trope. "Oh you don't like leaky abstraction X, so what we should all code in binary!?" I think it comes from a kind of "Just World" spin off whereby all abstractions are considered pretty much equal, and it's cavalier to not code to the "highest" of these, no matter how many rickety chairs you've piled on top of each other to get that high. Not all abstractions are created equal. As an example, choosing to use vanilla JS over react is not the same as hand-coding assembly instead of using C, Zig or Rust.

akiselev 4y ago
> Not all abstractions are created equal. I'd go so far as to extend the statistics aphorism about models to software abstractions: all abstractions are wrong (/leaky?), but some are useful for now. The problem with software abstractions is that they, unlike the fundamental laws of physics, model code organization and business logic that frequently changes. These changes often make no sense beyond "VP lifer thought it was a good idea" so our house of cards is built on ever shifting sands. No abstraction short of a pointer can survive that.
- LAC-Tech 4y ago
  No I get that all abstractions leak on some level. But some leak a lot more than others. And as an industry we don't seem to have good mental models or languages around that. More than once I've seen using the abstraction + working around the leaks being more complex than just using the the thing underneath the abstraction. I have no pithy phrase to describe that scenario, without the "why don't we just code in binary" retort.
randomsearch 4y ago
If your argument is that using someone else’s abstractions is bad because you can write your own (which is what this article is saying), then the standard cliched reply is accurate. Cliches are cliches for a reason.

akiselev 4y ago

> Not all abstractions are created equal. I'd go so far as to extend the statistics aphorism about models to software abstractions: all abstractions are wrong (/leaky?), but some are useful for now. The problem with software abstractions is that they, unlike the fundamental laws of physics, model code organization and business logic that frequently changes. These changes often make no sense beyond "VP lifer thought it was a good idea" so our house of cards is built on ever shifting sands. No abstraction short of a pointer can survive that.

LAC-Tech 4y ago
No I get that all abstractions leak on some level. But some leak a lot more than others. And as an industry we don't seem to have good mental models or languages around that. More than once I've seen using the abstraction + working around the leaks being more complex than just using the the thing underneath the abstraction. I have no pithy phrase to describe that scenario, without the "why don't we just code in binary" retort.

randomsearch 4y ago

If your argument is that using someone else’s abstractions is bad because you can write your own (which is what this article is saying), then the standard cliched reply is accurate. Cliches are cliches for a reason.