Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The S stands for Simple

72.249.21.88

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: The S stands for Simple

#11

Post by kabdib »

10ren wrote: post #4

Interoperability is a vitally important but hard problem. CORBA and then SOAP have been thoroughly adopted, then widely condemned. What's next?

Frankly I think there's some kind of Godwin's Law going on here, where something is insufficiently Enterprisey until an 'S' is attached to it, whereupon IT folks and professional donut-stuffing standards committee complexifiers wade in, and three linear bookshelf feet later you've got a Standard. And it's Simple. And all the devs who use it, who have a clue, just want to commit Suicide.

But maybe it's just me.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#12

Post by antonovka2 »

jcapote wrote: post #7
10ren wrote: post #4

Interoperability is a vitally important but hard problem. CORBA and then SOAP have been thoroughly adopted, then widely condemned. What's next?

bert-rpc.org

I hope not. Between Protobuf and Thrift, I don't see the point of adopting a less efficient, even more niche NIH serialization format and RPC protocol.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#13

Post by JulianMorrison »

10ren wrote: post #4

Interoperability is a vitally important but hard problem. CORBA and then SOAP have been thoroughly adopted, then widely condemned. What's next?

JSON in HTTP GET/POST. It's more of a nuisance, but it forces you to face the network issues head-on, and code that reads JSON can't afford to make assumptions, so it ends up less brittle.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#14

Post by dflock »

psadauskas wrote: post #9

Its been my experience that anything with Simple or Lightweight as one of the letters in the acronym is usually anything but.

In the same way that the old communist states often had both 'democratic' and 'republic' in their over-long official names.

Hmm, LDAP. I'd hate to meet HDAP.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#15

Post by three14 »

If you know that you're only going to be using the Microsoft stack, and you actually do get to use the tools that cover all this up, do you still end up regretting that there's SOAP under all of it?

I've just found myself working on a project like that for the first time, and saw this, and started wondering.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#16

Post by houseabsolute »

antonovka2 wrote: post #12
jcapote wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

bert-rpc.org

I hope not. Between Protobuf and Thrift, I don't see the point of adopting a less efficient, even more niche NIH serialization format and RPC protocol.

Might be different if there were already numerous libraries that supported it but honestly if the extent of it is support in four languages (plus a few more that support the serializer) it's probably not worth wasting the effort unless it differentiates itself substantially from the existing solutions.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#18

Post by mnemonik »

csytan wrote: post #17

Using the Q & A style to introduce a topic works really well. I hope more people start writing like this.

If you like this you should read The Little Schemer (if you haven't yet, that is) it is written in dialogue/question-answer format. Very Socratic method. I can't recommend the rest of the series; I haven't read them yet. The Little Schemer is excellent though.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#19

Post by InclinedPlane »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #13
10ren wrote: post #4

Interoperability is a vitally important but hard problem. CORBA and then SOAP have been thoroughly adopted, then widely condemned. What's next?

JSON in HTTP GET/POST. It's more of a nuisance, but it forces you to face the network issues head-on, and code that reads JSON can't afford to make assumptions, so it ends up less brittle.

Not just JSON and HTTP but specifically REST w/ JSON. There's a lot to be said for such a model.

Re: The S stands for Simple

#20

Post by samuel »

dflock wrote: post #14
psadauskas wrote: post #9

Its been my experience that anything with Simple or Lightweight as one of the letters in the acronym is usually anything but.

In the same way that the old communist states often had both 'democratic' and 'republic' in their over-long official names. Hmm, LDAP. I'd hate to meet HDAP.

LDAP is "Lightweight" only when compared with X.500..
Post reply on HN