4 ms·
This is exactly my take on folks bemoaning the evolution of complexity in software (and hardware) worldwide. To lend some credence to other folks points of vie
by softfalcon 1y ago
This is exactly my take on folks bemoaning the evolution of complexity in software (and hardware) worldwide.
To lend some credence to other folks points of view, there are arguments I can agree with that are adjacent:
- "We don't need that complex framework for our needs, we stick to a simpler, older library."
- "We decided to not use <shiniest_new_toolkit> it had performance issues that the maintainers are still sorting out."
- "Working with the new framework showed a lot of promise, but there is still a lot of instability in the API since it's so new. We couldn't commit to using a toolkit that hasn't been nailed down yet."
These are actual concerns and shows caution towards adopting new things until they match your use-case, dev-timelines, and performance requirements.
- shermantanktop 1y agoI’d add “The DOM api probably already has everything you need and has zero dependencies.” That applies to many lower-level APIs which have gotten smarter and better over the years—often in response to the needs of fancy frameworks, but now they are pretty rich by themselves. “I don’t have time to learn a new framework, I have things to do.” Everybody’s cool new abstraction is a cognitive burden for someone else.