Re: Simple things should be simple

2010-09-09 Thread Paul deGrandis
I think the point is missed with this example.

Given your hello world example, how much effort does it take you to
add URL args, make it operate like a RESTful resource, change the
route that triggers it, add user sessions, address security concerns,
template out responses, tweak those templates without touching the
code, etc.

Some in that list are easy to do via the method above, others are
painstaking.

What you give up in simplicity, you gain in extensibility and
scalability (often, not always).  This is true across almost all of
the primary non-functional requirements.

A good framework is one that lets you build up to a problem, using
only the pieces you need and minimizing the time you spend operating
with the framework.  The mindset in this community naturally
gravitates to that solution (function and component combination), but
you can find it in other frameworks/languages (Pylons is a great
example).

Paul

On Sep 9, 8:47 am, Mike Meyer mwm-keyword-googlegroups.
620...@mired.org wrote:
 On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 16:28:48 +0100

 Edmund Jackson edmundsjack...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi Mike,

      Could you perhaps present a counter-example of greater simplicity ?

 $ cat -  /usr/local/www/apache22/cgi-bin/hello-world.sh
 #!/bin/sh

 echo 'Content-type: text/plain\n'
 echo Hello World
 ^D
 $ chomd 755 /usr/local/www/apache22/cgi-bin/hello-world.sh

 Done. Three lines of source code. 0 lines of framework setup. 1 tool
 (sh). Pretty much the same thing works for python, perl, etc.  It's
 about as robust as can be asked for - that's the nature of
 apache. Performance is going to be mediocre at best. That's the
 trade-off for simplicity.

       mike
 --
 Mike Meyer m...@mired.org          http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
 Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.

 O ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail -www.asciiribbon.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en


Re: Why so?

2010-09-03 Thread Paul deGrandis
Thanks for sharing this link David.  Love it.

On Sep 3, 8:54 am, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:50 AM, fin gpl...@gmail.com wrote:
  It is better to have 100 functions in one category than 10 functions
  in 10 categories?

  I don't think so. See:
 http://clojure.github.com/clojure/clojure.core-api.html

 Clojure functions categorized:http://clojuredocs.org/quickref/Clojure%20Core

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en


<    1   2