Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 10:20:38 -0800 Louis Santillan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Mattias Andrée > wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 09:10:50 -0800 > > Louis Santillan wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Adrian Grigore > >> The small part may sound like suckless, but I find it > >> to > > > > It should be noted that suckless is not about small > > software packages (with no reduction in the total > > size of all package), it is about simple (and clear > > and frugal) software. There is nothing in the philosophy > > saying that libraries should be split into pieces. > > That was the point I was trying to make. nodejs/npm > crowd confuse small with simple, clear, and frugal. > Everywhere you see "only 1.2kb when gzipped!" which is a > false measure of complexity, performance, and design. Really, people use that as a measure. And when gzipped at that. If you are going to measure the size, use the sum of all files or the size of an uncompressed tarball. But using the program complexity would be a better measurement, if course it is not a good measurement. There is no good measurement for complexity, and especially not for design. Performance of course can measured, but you have to be really careful. > > > Really, their community made something called > > "Modern JavaScript"? How vain and arrogant. > > Yeah...everything after the rise to popularity of nodejs, > I call "modern JS". As someone who started embedding > SpiderMonkey JS 18 years ago, and continues today with > V8, I intentionally call it "modern JS" (lowercase m). > People are really making some dumb ass language & > ecosystem decisions these days, getting bit by the > "agile/devops/continuous delivery" bug, and adding > features to JS every other year, including many features > that seem to add little or no performance/developer > productivity. ...But I digress... > pgptPoCb8uRIj.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Mattias Andrée wrote: > On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 09:10:50 -0800 > Louis Santillan wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Adrian Grigore >> The small part may sound like suckless, but I find it to > > It should be noted that suckless is not about small > software packages (with no reduction in the total > size of all package), it is about simple (and clear > and frugal) software. There is nothing in the philosophy > saying that libraries should be split into pieces. That was the point I was trying to make. nodejs/npm crowd confuse small with simple, clear, and frugal. Everywhere you see "only 1.2kb when gzipped!" which is a false measure of complexity, performance, and design. > Really, their community made something called > "Modern JavaScript"? How vain and arrogant. Yeah...everything after the rise to popularity of nodejs, I call "modern JS". As someone who started embedding SpiderMonkey JS 18 years ago, and continues today with V8, I intentionally call it "modern JS" (lowercase m). People are really making some dumb ass language & ecosystem decisions these days, getting bit by the "agile/devops/continuous delivery" bug, and adding features to JS every other year, including many features that seem to add little or no performance/developer productivity. ...But I digress...
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 09:10:50 -0800 Louis Santillan wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Adrian Grigore > wrote: > > I wanted to know what's your general opinion on > > https://github.com/clibs/clib. > > I take issue with some of the libs included, especially > tj's [0]. He's also the creator of clibs, a noted > contributor to nodejs (among other things), so I would > have expected him to respect licensing & upstream > contributions better. I too take issue with some of the libs. Feels like some of them has been implemented out of vanity (and have been implemented halfassed.) > > Overall, it's a kind of a nodejs/npm approach to C > (dozens small modules glued together to make an app). I concur. Approaching C like this is a bad idea. It also feels like they are aware that breaking up libraries into a set of one-function libraries has benefits in JavaScript, because they do not have to download a huge library for only a few functions. But when it is not over a network, this is not longer an advantage, instead you are complicating dependency management. JavaScript may need a package manager because why might not find the libraries in your distro's package manager, but you will find C libraries, if you don't you should add it. Their community consists mostly of Web people, so it none of this should be surprising; except the existence of the project itself. (You will even find HTML in license files.) > The small part may sound like suckless, but I find it to It should be noted that suckless is not about small software packages (with no reduction in the total size of all package), it is about simple (and clear and frugal) software. There is nothing in the philosophy saying that libraries should be split into pieces. > be less collaborative, fewer abrasive personalities, less > rigorous, and less cohesive of development process than > what suckless philosophy tends to promote. IMO, > nodejs/npm/modern JS has a high noise to signal ratio Really, their community made something called "Modern JavaScript"? How vain and arrogant. > (dozens to hundreds of modules to do the same thing that > are all incompatible and inconsistent) while suckless is > happier to produce fewer but higher quality lines of code > (and removal of code is of even higher value). > > [0] > https://github.com/clibs/jsmn/commit/8ef1413ada1b963795f15c6264aa487c95ed0779 > pgpXFsdvfn91P.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Adrian Grigore wrote: > I wanted to know what's your general opinion on https://github.com/clibs/clib. I take issue with some of the libs included, especially tj's [0]. He's also the creator of clibs, a noted contributor to nodejs (among other things), so I would have expected him to respect licensing & upstream contributions better. Overall, it's a kind of a nodejs/npm approach to C (dozens small modules glued together to make an app). The small part may sound like suckless, but I find it to be less collaborative, fewer abrasive personalities, less rigorous, and less cohesive of development process than what suckless philosophy tends to promote. IMO, nodejs/npm/modern JS has a high noise to signal ratio (dozens to hundreds of modules to do the same thing that are all incompatible and inconsistent) while suckless is happier to produce fewer but higher quality lines of code (and removal of code is of even higher value). [0] https://github.com/clibs/jsmn/commit/8ef1413ada1b963795f15c6264aa487c95ed0779
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
Need to install sta.li and see how that works out. :) It's on my todo list. On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Anselm R Garbe wrote: > On 15 December 2015 at 11:20, Adrian Grigore > wrote: >> I wanted to know what's your general opinion on >> https://github.com/clibs/clib. > > My proposal is using git for binaries as well (for whole core systems). > > get checkout 0.1 > > get diff 0.2 > > etc. > > BR, > Anselm > -- Thanks, Adi
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On 15 December 2015 at 11:20, Adrian Grigore wrote: > I wanted to know what's your general opinion on https://github.com/clibs/clib. My proposal is using git for binaries as well (for whole core systems). get checkout 0.1 get diff 0.2 etc. BR, Anselm
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:20:52PM +0200, Adrian Grigore wrote: > Hey guys, > > I wanted to know what's your general opinion on https://github.com/clibs/clib. > > Disclaimer: I'm not a C programmer, but planning to learn. Well, package managers suck.
Re: [dev] C package manager-ish
On Tue, 15 Dec 2015 12:20:52 +0200 Adrian Grigore wrote: > Hey guys, > > I wanted to know what's your general opinion on > https://github.com/clibs/clib. > > Disclaimer: I'm not a C programmer, but planning to learn. > Personally, I despise language specific package managers. pgpXWS4sKW9kn.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[dev] C package manager-ish
Hey guys, I wanted to know what's your general opinion on https://github.com/clibs/clib. Disclaimer: I'm not a C programmer, but planning to learn. -- Thanks, Adi
