3 ms·

I think it’s nice that it’s just an SDK and a Postgres database, but they don’t have SDKs for the languages we use at work.

a_poliakov 12d ago
Hey, out of curiosity: which languages are those?
- drdexebtjl 12d ago
  Mostly C#, as I see your Rust SDK is under development. Unfortunately it appears someone vibe-coded a port of the Java SDK for .NET and namesquatted the `Dbos.Transact` package on NuGet [1], making it look like an official SDK. It's also not a very good port, mirroring the Java implementation instead of using idiomatic C#. If you ever plan on releasing a .NET library, I suggest opening up a dispute resolution [2] with the owner (it really is just an email to the guy, CCing NuGet support) and reserving the `Dbos` prefix [3]. [1]: https://www.nuget.org/packages/Dbos.Transact/0.0.0-alpha.0.47 https://www.nuget.org/packages/Dbos.Transact/0.0.0-alpha.0.4... [2]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/policies/dispute-resolution https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/policies/d... [3]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/id-prefix-reservation https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/id-prefix-...
ninininino 12d ago
Porting and rewrites between languages is a task frontier models excel at
- drdexebtjl 12d ago
  No. A huge selling point of these code-first workflow engines is that they make writing durable workflows a lot like writing non-durable code, to the maximum extent that the language allows, such that the workflow orchestration disappears. That is, they require good taste and opinionated API design first, porting skills second. The SDK for each language ends up being substantially different. Frontier models are not very good at this yet. I've tried. Ultimately I couldn't justify the effort when there are other workflow engines out there.

3 ms·

I think it’s nice that it’s just an SDK and a Postgres database, but they don’t have SDKs for the languages we use at work.

by drdexebtjl 12d ago

a_poliakov 12d ago
Hey, out of curiosity: which languages are those?
- drdexebtjl 12d ago
  Mostly C#, as I see your Rust SDK is under development. Unfortunately it appears someone vibe-coded a port of the Java SDK for .NET and namesquatted the `Dbos.Transact` package on NuGet [1], making it look like an official SDK. It's also not a very good port, mirroring the Java implementation instead of using idiomatic C#. If you ever plan on releasing a .NET library, I suggest opening up a dispute resolution [2] with the owner (it really is just an email to the guy, CCing NuGet support) and reserving the `Dbos` prefix [3]. [1]: https://www.nuget.org/packages/Dbos.Transact/0.0.0-alpha.0.47 https://www.nuget.org/packages/Dbos.Transact/0.0.0-alpha.0.4... [2]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/policies/dispute-resolution https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/policies/d... [3]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/id-prefix-reservation https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/nuget-org/id-prefix-...
ninininino 12d ago
Porting and rewrites between languages is a task frontier models excel at
- drdexebtjl 12d ago
  No. A huge selling point of these code-first workflow engines is that they make writing durable workflows a lot like writing non-durable code, to the maximum extent that the language allows, such that the workflow orchestration disappears. That is, they require good taste and opinionated API design first, porting skills second. The SDK for each language ends up being substantially different. Frontier models are not very good at this yet. I've tried. Ultimately I couldn't justify the effort when there are other workflow engines out there.