3 ms·
That's an odd response. If you think some of the arguments of the article were made poorly, point them out and say why. The source article seems pretty cogent t
by akanet 12y ago
That's an odd response. If you think some of the arguments of the article were made poorly, point them out and say why. The source article seems pretty cogent to me; largely being an argument for not using REST for APIs, your comment about browsers seems misplaced.
- masklinn 12y agoSee existing discussion of the article from 20h ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9138700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9138700 The problem with > If you think some of the arguments of the article were made poorly, point them out and say why. Is that the linked article is fractally wrong. It's not so much that it has bad arguments, it's that there's more or less nothing which is correct in the article, and trying to reply to a specific incorrect statement only brings more incorrections, recursively, ending up with a tentative response which is longer than the original post by an order of magnitude. The core issues are these: the author has no understanding whatsoever of REST (which I guess they can hardly be faulted for, since few people care to understand it), and is reinventing RPC-over-HTTP (badly and apparently with no awareness that it already exists).