5 ms·
Same for "framework" which is: I have no idea what I'm doing
by skratlo 11y ago
Same for "framework" which is: I have no idea what I'm doing
- highmastdon 11y agoSame goes for 'abstraction', it hides the essence of what is happening. Therefore every abstraction is evil.
- mercurial 11y agoHopefully this is sarcasm. Code without abstraction can also very efficiently hide what is happening by having a disastrous signal-to-noise ratio, combined with all the potential for errors you get when repeating the same pattern many times.
- Lawtonfogle 11y agoCode is abstraction. With no abstraction you have to build your systems with lots of nand gates and a clock.
- willstepp 11y agoAbstractions are necessary to write software, unless you speak binary code, so calling them evil is a bit hyperbolic. My point is at some level you have to trust the abstractions of a system or else nothing would get done. That doesn't mean you shouldn't have a conceptual understanding of the lower levels, but they aren't evil!
- VLM 11y agoIts possible to use abstractions that aren't inversions or leaky. Practically no one does a good job of it, so you are correct in practice and experience, although in theory it is possible and sometimes people do pull it off successfully. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_inversion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_inversion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaky_abstraction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaky_abstraction
- TallGuyShort 11y agoI think you should strive to understand what is happening under the abstraction, but abstraction is a useful tool. It's a bit like calling something a "crutch". Sounds bad, but what if you have a broken leg? Crutches allow you to get over the problem and make progress. I have to write software that runs on any hardware from any number of vendors and multiple operating systems. Not using abstractions would destroy my effectiveness.
- rjbwork 11y agoHow are people missing the sarcasm of this comment?
- pmontra 11y agoSometimes yes, but sometimes you started writing CGIs in C, then Perl, than you wrote your microframework, then you decided to use a standard one. This has been my evolution and even if I don't understand everything inside the frameworks I'm using now I have a general idea. And furthermore, what can we do about it? Writing code from scratch or maintaining or own frameworks is more or less the way to losing customers, unless you are a Facebook and you call engineer and push a React.
- moron4hire 11y agoIf more people went through that process, the frameworks we have might be fewer and of better quality.
- jessaustin 11y agoJudging by the sheer number of frameworks we have, everyone who went through that process actually ended up writing one, or five.
- collyw 11y agoThat sounds like where I am coming from. Looking at Django questions on Stack Overflow, a lot of people don't.
- sanderjd 11y agoThank you for this. I hate the "frameworks are for people who don't know what they're doing!" meme. Sometimes they're just for people who have thought about the trade-offs and decided a popular framework has many advantages.
- manicdee 11y agoProgramming languages are for lazy people who don't like flipping switches to code aseembly by hand.
- bandrami 11y ago"Framework" at least pretty reliably means some form of code generation is going on.