5 ms·

>But now that I think about it, I realize why people have a hard time understanding REST. It's not a "design" constraint any more than OOP is. It's an implement

>But now that I think about it, I realize why people have a hard time understanding REST. It's not a "design" constraint any more than OOP is. It's an implementation constraint. Your attempt to enforce some dichotomy between design and implementation is hopelessly misguided. >That's why REST emphasizes caching, stateless communication, the appropriate use of status codes, and the appropriate use of VERBs (idempotent vs non). These don't solve the major problems. If I want caching I can trivially implement it myself. It's a useless thing to implement at the architecture level. Similarly for idempotency etc. It's all a huge academic wank. An appropriately designed protocol will solve all these problems without the constraints. >I wouldn't write an OS kernel in Ruby either. What smug yet clueless response. You're begging the question. I'm frankly bored of talking to someone who knows nothing about protocol design, but defends HTTP as a "proven" technology. It clearly isn't, it fails on many levels, and the whole web stack is completely fucked. Good day.

noblethrasher 15y ago
My last statement was rude. Please accept my apologies.
parasubvert 15y ago
> These don't solve the major problems. If I want caching I can trivially implement it myself. It's a useless thing to implement at the architecture level. Legions of computer scientists and computer engineers disagree with you. Caching is fundamentally an architectural concern. >I'm frankly bored of talking to someone who knows nothing about protocol design.... Please point to your widely commercially deployed protocols before accusing others of ignorance. > ..but defends HTTP as a "proven" technology. It clearly isn't, it fails on many levels, and the whole web stack is completely fucked. Good day. You've demonstrated an astounding lack of respect for pretty much everyone on this topic here, and I'm finding it incredulous myself to have to tolerate the amount of bitterness being emanated from you. Why are you participating here it all, unless you just want to tell us we're all clueless, and you can feel superior?

noblethrasher 15y ago

My last statement was rude. Please accept my apologies.

parasubvert 15y ago

> These don't solve the major problems. If I want caching I can trivially implement it myself. It's a useless thing to implement at the architecture level. Legions of computer scientists and computer engineers disagree with you. Caching is fundamentally an architectural concern. >I'm frankly bored of talking to someone who knows nothing about protocol design.... Please point to your widely commercially deployed protocols before accusing others of ignorance. > ..but defends HTTP as a "proven" technology. It clearly isn't, it fails on many levels, and the whole web stack is completely fucked. Good day. You've demonstrated an astounding lack of respect for pretty much everyone on this topic here, and I'm finding it incredulous myself to have to tolerate the amount of bitterness being emanated from you. Why are you participating here it all, unless you just want to tell us we're all clueless, and you can feel superior?