Fedora disimprovements: am I alone?

[Bryn M. Reeves]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/27/2012 12:12 PM, 夜神　岩男 wrote:
> That is not optimization, that is interface design. The two are 
> entirely different. The "premature optimization" bit is about 
> choosing implementation clarity (expression) at the expense of 
> execution speed over potentially confusing code that increases 
> performance at runtime (optimization).

The set of verbs and options systemctl accepts are the interface
design. I think you are stretching things beyond the plausible to try
to claim that a minor tweak to save 8 characters in a common
invocation is UI design. It's just optimizing a common case.

> The difference between .service being a permitted implication VS a 
> mandatory explication is one of interface and does not impact the 
> implementation of the subsystem. Its the same argument as
> requiring that everyone actually type "self" in 'def foo(self):' in
> Python. I think its silly, others think it is more clear to be
> explicit to that degree when programming.
> 
> But pushing systemd around from the command line is not
> programming unless its part of a script, and then the explicit
> .service extension is entirely appropriate. And speaking of
> scripting the shell, we've had this debate before a very long time
> ago. It resulted in the tradition of providing GNU flag extensions
> in addition to the old-style terse single-dash switches for the
> vast majority of command line tools. In scripts it can be polite
> (well, used to be considered polite, if anyone would remember
> today...) to write 'cut --delimiter="-" --fields=2,3 foo.txt'
> instead of 'cut -d "-" -f 2,3', but both are perfectly acceptable
> and this provides a way to be explicit for posterity yet terse for
> practical reasons.

No idea what point any of this is getting at. The systemd utilities
support both long and short options where it makes sense to do so.
It's almost as though someone designed it that way..

> Have we forgotten that CLI *is* an interface and hence worth 
> discussing? The "I" is there for a reason. And how on earth is it 
> possible that we've forgotten what a cultural rule-of-thumb as 
> important as "premature optimization is the root of all evil" 
> actually means?

Go ahead and discuss to your heart's content but flaming at people and
calling a UI "unusable" and implying that the authors of that
interface are "not smart" has no place in that discussion and should
not be accepted.

Regards,
Bryn.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk9xuBkACgkQ6YSQoMYUY94PoACgocSkp1anNoBK5hJgxMAV86U3
+e0AoMIQziOpLFqOS3rfWLgPHZ+ewyzD
=IDSg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----