Even better quote, I love using this one.
“So, with AI writing code for us, all we need is an unambiguous way to define, what all our business requirements are for the software, what all the edge cases are, and how it should handle them.”
“We in the industry call that ‘code.’”
I mean, REST-ful JSON APIs can be perfectly type-safe, if their developers actually take care to make them that way. And the self-descriptive nature of JSON is arguably a benefit in really large public-facing APIs. But yeah, gRPC forces a certain amount of type-safety and version control, and gRPC with protobuf is SUCH a pleasure to work with.
Give it time, though, it’s definitely gaining traction.
#4 for me.
Proper HTTP Status code for semantic identification. Duplicating that in the response body would be silly.
User-friendly “message” value for the lazy, who just wanna toss that up to the user. Also, ideally, this would be what a dev looks at in logs for troubelshooting.
Tightly-controlled unqiue identifier “code” for the error, allowing consumers to build their own contextual error handling or reporting on top of this system. Also, allows for more-detailed types of errors to be identified and given specific handling and recovery logic, beyond just the status code. Like, sure, there’s probably not gonna be multiple sub-types of 403 error, but there may be a bunch of different useful sub-types for a 400 on a form submission.
Yeah, you need a way to specify what you want with a high degree of both flexibility and specificity. We have a term for that in the industry, it’s called “writing code”.
The hell does “single-capacity” mean here? The article doesn’t specify.
My god, this speaks to me.
Is it just me, or does this seem like a reasonable solution? Assuming it’s technically feasible.
I’m with Arrowhead as well, none of this shit is coming from them, it’s coming from Sony. The most you can criticize them for is partnering with Sony in the first place.
Was intrigued until step one of “Getting Started”:
Install Node.js 20 LTS
That’s gonna be a “no” from me.
I had the exact same question, did the exact same thing, and had the exact same response. EVERYONE does this, it’s infuriating. If you’re going to have a public-facing info page about your project or product, you need to assume that people know NOTHING about it.
The XZ exploit was found because some dude was investigating performance issues in a system, and noticed an unusual amount of time being spent in SSH processing, IIRC.
So, you’re a tech nerd who wants an addictive game?
Factorio.
Also Satisfactory, but I’m not sure how well it runs on Linux. Fairly sure Factorio will run on just about anything
Windows 11 has ads NOW, in the enterprise install I’m provided at work.
MLB 66
I think it’s a fallacy to say that you can or should build an application layer that’s completely DBMS agnostic. Even if you are very careful to only write SQL queries with features that are part of the official SQL standard, you’re still coupled to your particular DBMS’s internal implementations for query compilation, planning, optimization, etc. At enterprise scale, there’s still going to be plenty of queries that suddenly perform like crap, after a DBMS swap.
In my mind, standardization for things like ODBC or Hibernate or Entity Framework or whatever else isn’t meant to abstract away the underlying DBMS, it’s meant to promote compatibility.
Not to mention that you’re tying your own hands by locking yourself out of non-standard DBMS features, that you could be REALLY useful to you, if you have the right use-cases. JSON generation and indexing is the big one that comes to mind. Also, geospatial data tables.
For context, my professional work for the past 6 years is an Oracle/.NET/Browser application, and we are HEAVILY invested in Oracle. Most notably, we do a LOT of ETL, and that all runs exclusively in the DBMS itself, in PL/SQL procedures orchestratedbbybthe Oracle job scheduler. Attempting to do this kind of data manipulation by round-tripping it into .NET code would make things significantly worse.
So, my opinion could definitely be a result of what’s been normalized for me, in my day job. But I’ve also had a few other collaborative side projects where I think the “don’t try and abstract away the DBMS” advice holds true.
I’ll take this over the more “classic” styles, when people seed to believe they were paying the compiler by the character.
You mention Bally and baseball, mlb66 was my go-to last year.
I mean, I’m paraphrasing, too.