4 ms·
So you prefer not having a choice over having a choice because choice will lead to discussions to pick the best solution. Quite an odd view from a software eng
by zak_mc_kracken 12y ago
So you prefer not having a choice over having a choice because choice will lead to discussions to pick the best solution.
Quite an odd view from a software engineer.
I like having as much choice as possible.
- giovannibajo1 12y agoHaving a standard library for a specific task doesn't forbid alternatives to be implemented and used. But it discourages them enough, which is a very good thing for consistency (especially in reading code), lowers the barrier to entry (eg: I don't have to learn how to parse json with the specific library the project I'm contributing to is using), reduces binary size (I don't link three different http libraries, mine and those chosen by my dependencies) and generically reduce the time wasted by humanity in useless duplications of efforts. When the standard sucks, well, good alternatives will appear. Also, the sad state of Python packaging is the reason why stdlib bitrotted; technically, your package manager could take care of backward compatibility: if eg at some point in the future you want to switch from a json library to a (far) better one, more in line with how idiomatic language has evolved, you just need to repackage the old one as a third party package, and make sure the packager manager brings it down for the user automatically.
- rodgerd 12y ago> So you prefer not having a choice over having a choice because choice will lead to discussions to pick the best solution. I prefer to get things done.