4 ms·

I think there's a significant distinction here to be made between "configuration" and "programming". Do I copy/paste swaths of code that I don't understand and

I think there's a significant distinction here to be made between "configuration" and "programming". Do I copy/paste swaths of code that I don't understand and put them in my programs? No, absolutely not, because each line is one I can reason about and want to understand. But do I copy/paste swaths of configuration files / init scripts / etc, without understanding the implications of every single configuration? Yes, absolutely, because the depth behind each of those options is often irrelevant to me. (until I discover otherwise late at night when an alarm goes off (!!)) I think it is important to distinguish these. I don't think any dev that's done ops work would claim they aren't guilty of the latter, but at the same time I think very few good devs ever, and I mean ever, do the first.

lil_cain 12y ago
Init scripts are code though. I mean, they're code that's mostly boiler plate, but they're still code - I can do arbitary things in them, reasonably unconstrained by their stated purpose.
GauntletWizard 12y ago
Configuration is programming. Perhaps I, being the devops sort, am somewhat alone in this opinion, but I opine it anyway: Configuration is programming. Often very simple programming, but programming nonetheless. There's a configuration language a Google that's stated goal is that it's not turing complete... and yet it is, because it was a necessity for achieving the expressiveness, and now it's almost entirely unreadable because of the convolutions needed to achieve the real-world solutions necessary in it. There's another that's python based, and widely bashed for being 'too hard to reason about', but it has none of the problems with disgusting 'standard' libraries. Where I am now, Facebook, has adopted a python based model... and used almost none of python's features. Instead, everything is generated through convoluted lists and dictionaries, and it's treated with very little exception as a json file. This saddens me. Almost all configuration should be done by libraries with sane defaults. So should programming, even though it's not.

lil_cain 12y ago

Init scripts are code though. I mean, they're code that's mostly boiler plate, but they're still code - I can do arbitary things in them, reasonably unconstrained by their stated purpose.

GauntletWizard 12y ago

Configuration is programming. Perhaps I, being the devops sort, am somewhat alone in this opinion, but I opine it anyway: Configuration is programming. Often very simple programming, but programming nonetheless. There's a configuration language a Google that's stated goal is that it's not turing complete... and yet it is, because it was a necessity for achieving the expressiveness, and now it's almost entirely unreadable because of the convolutions needed to achieve the real-world solutions necessary in it. There's another that's python based, and widely bashed for being 'too hard to reason about', but it has none of the problems with disgusting 'standard' libraries. Where I am now, Facebook, has adopted a python based model... and used almost none of python's features. Instead, everything is generated through convoluted lists and dictionaries, and it's treated with very little exception as a json file. This saddens me. Almost all configuration should be done by libraries with sane defaults. So should programming, even though it's not.