4 ms·
"Simple" is an interesting term. I've always found it to be very relative to what someone's actual experiences and knowledge bases are. For example, virtual ma
by hiAndrewQuinn 3y ago
"Simple" is an interesting term. I've always found it to be very relative to what someone's actual experiences and knowledge bases are.
For example, virtual machines are something I and probably most other people consider "simple". They're pretty much just little computers. For the most part, I can just work with VMs the same way I would work with computers. No sweat.
My DevOps pedigree, however, also means I consider Docker containers and even some light k8s stuff as pretty "simple" - when these two things feel to other people like massive overcomplications.
On the other hand, I'm pretty new to GraphQL, and it feels to me vastly more confusing than good old fashioned REST API endpoints, where I can crack open the code and actually see exactly how that particular endpoint works. I am mostly alone in my org when it comes to this feeling, because I haven't digested the abstractions that make GraphQL work as well.
I don't really have a good answer then for what simple is beyond "I know it (kinda) when I see it".
- armanboyaci 3y agoVery good and important observation. In his talk "Simple made easy" [1] Rich Hickey defines simple as opposite of complex and easy as opposite of hard. The easiness is relative (as you described) and depends on the things you are familiar with. For example, Docker containers and k8s stuff is easy (for you), and GraphQL is hard (for you). The simplicity should be assessed (somehow) more objectively. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdOUGdseq4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxdOUGdseq4