5 ms·

I find it striking that in the same day I saw a video about how someone "Made an API in 20 minutes with one prompt" and this. The two approaches seem very diver

by throwaway2016a 2y ago

I find it striking that in the same day I saw a video about how someone "Made an API in 20 minutes with one prompt" and this. The two approaches seem very divergent. One that is almost cavalier about things like security, standards, etc and another that is (almost) over engineered. One observation, is that I there are two trains of thought. Using OAD (Open API Descriptions) as a source of truth and generating code from there or treating OAD as an artifact that comes out of some other tools. I personally see OpenAPI as kind of a glue that can allow different tooling to be able to speak the same language. Overall I found the linked Moonwalk[1] document to be more interesting. But there is some interesting analysis to be found in this article as well. [1] https://www.openapis.org/blog/2023/12/06/openapi-moonwalk-2024 https://www.openapis.org/blog/2023/12/06/openapi-moonwalk-20...

handrews 2y ago
Yeah this article is more about how we (the OpenAPI Initiative) are designing the next versions of the OpenAPI Specification than it is about how to use it. The diagram does include both an OAD generator and editor, intended to encompass both code-first and description-first (which doesn't make too much difference for this blog post). The Moonwalk article is definitely more general purpose! This is "OK Moonwalk has a great vision, but how do we actually make it a real spec?" I've been using variations of this diagram in the weekly Moonwalk calls for the past month or two.
- throwaway2016a 2y ago
  > OK Moonwalk has a great vision, but how do we actually make it a real spec? I'm not sure the article really succeeds if that was the goal. I suspect that there might be some aspects of the discussion that are taking place that are missing from the article making it a little difficult for someone who wasn't in those discussions to connect the dots. Don't get me wrong, I think the article had some useful pieces in it, I just think if that was the goal of the article it could possibly use some additional framing for people who don't have the full context. With that said, I really appreciate transparency into the thought process!
  - handrews 2y ago
    > I just think if that was the goal of the article it could possibly use some additional framing for people who don't have the full context. It's always a struggle to figure out how much explanation to put in before people see something like "20 minute read" and just refuse to read it. (BTW I don't mind the critical feedback at all- I'm just glad you found something useful in it). But keep in mind that _we_ haven't answered "how do we actually make it a real spec?" either! This is a snapshot of our efforts at this particular moment. Also, there's a reason that this is "part one in a series" :-)
re-thc 2y ago
> I find it striking that in the same day I saw a video about how someone "Made an API in 20 minutes with one prompt" and this You can also record a blank video on your phone for 20 minutes and call that a movie. Would anyone watch it? You can also build a house in days. Would it crack? Is it maintainable? What happens later? Who knows.
- lionkor 2y ago
  Those make great YouTube video titles.
- flessner 2y ago
  The ethos I have seen around these is usually "It doesn't have to be proper if it isn't making money" I think it's a fair attitude if your only goal is to make money, but it completely misses "why" you should build something... if you truly care about a problem you wouldn't haphazard it anyway.
  - throwaway2016a 2y ago
    > I think it's a fair attitude if your only goal is to make money Short term, yes. But it's a bit short sighted as most of the AI code I have seen has security and scalability issues that long term have potential to blow up in your face costing even more money. Granted that can usually be fixed by better prompts. But to right those prompts requires the person doing the "prompt engineering" (rolls eyes) to actually have a working knowledge of a lot of areas such as architecture, security, software engineering best practices, etc. And a lot of the influencers out there pushing AI openly admit to "not knowing how to code" let alone knowing the right way to build a technology product so that it scales and is safe.
  - re-thc 2y ago
    > "It doesn't have to be proper if it isn't making money" > I think it's a fair attitude if your only goal is to make money Is that why we often get so many posts about e.g. getting a huge bill on AWS or GCP? Or that so and so company shut them down or whatever else? I've seen far too many "temporary" solutions and "quick fixes" that always go beyond the scope and lifetime. Never have such a mindset.

handrews 2y ago

Yeah this article is more about how we (the OpenAPI Initiative) are designing the next versions of the OpenAPI Specification than it is about how to use it. The diagram does include both an OAD generator and editor, intended to encompass both code-first and description-first (which doesn't make too much difference for this blog post). The Moonwalk article is definitely more general purpose! This is "OK Moonwalk has a great vision, but how do we actually make it a real spec?" I've been using variations of this diagram in the weekly Moonwalk calls for the past month or two.

throwaway2016a 2y ago
> OK Moonwalk has a great vision, but how do we actually make it a real spec? I'm not sure the article really succeeds if that was the goal. I suspect that there might be some aspects of the discussion that are taking place that are missing from the article making it a little difficult for someone who wasn't in those discussions to connect the dots. Don't get me wrong, I think the article had some useful pieces in it, I just think if that was the goal of the article it could possibly use some additional framing for people who don't have the full context. With that said, I really appreciate transparency into the thought process!
- handrews 2y ago
  > I just think if that was the goal of the article it could possibly use some additional framing for people who don't have the full context. It's always a struggle to figure out how much explanation to put in before people see something like "20 minute read" and just refuse to read it. (BTW I don't mind the critical feedback at all- I'm just glad you found something useful in it). But keep in mind that _we_ haven't answered "how do we actually make it a real spec?" either! This is a snapshot of our efforts at this particular moment. Also, there's a reason that this is "part one in a series" :-)

re-thc 2y ago

> I find it striking that in the same day I saw a video about how someone "Made an API in 20 minutes with one prompt" and this You can also record a blank video on your phone for 20 minutes and call that a movie. Would anyone watch it? You can also build a house in days. Would it crack? Is it maintainable? What happens later? Who knows.

lionkor 2y ago
Those make great YouTube video titles.
flessner 2y ago
The ethos I have seen around these is usually "It doesn't have to be proper if it isn't making money" I think it's a fair attitude if your only goal is to make money, but it completely misses "why" you should build something... if you truly care about a problem you wouldn't haphazard it anyway.
- throwaway2016a 2y ago
  > I think it's a fair attitude if your only goal is to make money Short term, yes. But it's a bit short sighted as most of the AI code I have seen has security and scalability issues that long term have potential to blow up in your face costing even more money. Granted that can usually be fixed by better prompts. But to right those prompts requires the person doing the "prompt engineering" (rolls eyes) to actually have a working knowledge of a lot of areas such as architecture, security, software engineering best practices, etc. And a lot of the influencers out there pushing AI openly admit to "not knowing how to code" let alone knowing the right way to build a technology product so that it scales and is safe.
- re-thc 2y ago
  > "It doesn't have to be proper if it isn't making money" > I think it's a fair attitude if your only goal is to make money Is that why we often get so many posts about e.g. getting a huge bill on AWS or GCP? Or that so and so company shut them down or whatever else? I've seen far too many "temporary" solutions and "quick fixes" that always go beyond the scope and lifetime. Never have such a mindset.