Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

samtregar (2699)

samtregar
  (email not shown publicly)
http://sam.tregar.com/

Journal of samtregar (2699)

Thursday November 04, 2004
02:20 PM

Sick of Simple

[ #21713 ]
I'm a frequent reader of Freshmeat. I love finding new open-source projects, particularly when they're still in active development. What I don't love is reading over and over again about how project X is specially designed for simplicty. Example:

My Blog aims to be simple to use while taking care of many advanced features for the user.

Yes, of course you're aiming for simplicity! Aren't we all? Do these developers really believe that everyone else designs with complexity in mind? And as feature-creep sets in will they revise their stated goal? Not likely!

And don't get me started about "lite"!

-sam

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • "Aiming for simplicity" is usually a euphemism for "I've just started this system from scratch and it doesn't do anything yet."

  • Can't say that "aiming for simplicity" has ever been one of my goals... :-P
  • Yes, of course you're aiming for simplicity! Aren't we all?

    Obviously you haven't talked to enough Java developers.

  • Usually, when something states that it is simple, they mean that it is simpler than what was already out there.

    I sort of regret the name DBIx::Simple. Yes, it is simpler than DBI, but I never designed for simplicity. I designed for usability and readability, and simplicity is in this case just a tool.

    Still, from a Perl module marketing POV, ::Simple works. For some reason, people pick ::Simple or ::Lite before even considering other alternatives.

    Oh, and I do think some people design for complexity. One w
    • Usually, when something states that it is simple, they mean that it is simpler than what was already out there.

      Yup, that's pretty obvious. But so what? Most new projects start out simpler than their older alternatives. And as time goes on they'll get more complicated as they expand to fill nearby niches.

      I sort of regret the name DBIx::Simple.

      Good! It's a terrible name. It tells me almost nothing about the module that I couldn't already tell from DBIx. Just by writing a DBIx module you must be

    • I sort of regret the name DBIx::Simple.
      Then rename it. What name would you want it to have?
      • I'm not about to rename it. It's still simple, another name is hard to invent, and this name for some reason attracts users :)
  • First line of description in HTML::Template README [cpan.org]
    This module attempts make using HTML templates simple and natural.

    :-)