The unbridled humanity of APIs "But I think the Java guy has a point: 78 methods on your list objects isn't good. Less methods is good. Unless the result is stupid. Now, let's be honest here, Java is stupid. Dumb, idiotic, maybe written by people who aren't programmers; I just don't know how else to make sense of it. list.get(list.size() - 1) should be embarrassing. list.last or list[-1]? I think [-1] reads well enough, and fits into a very elegant set of functionality involving slices and whatnot. But I also think list.last is entirely justifiable. OTOH, list.get(0) isn't embarrassing, so list.first isn't as compelling."
"Maybe an interesting parallel is 0 vs. 1 indexing. 1 clearly seems more humane. I personally count starting from 1. I'm naturally inclined to index from 1. Languages go both ways on the choice...Of course Smalltalk indexes from 1, so no one gets everything right."
Humane Interfaces "Part of the reason this argument could go on forever is that Ruby’s Array is both an example of arguments for Humane design, and arguments against it...java.util.List isn’t really a shining example of good interface design either...Having two otherwise equivalent ways to perform the same operation is bad user-interface design, and it’s bad library interface design, because the existence of the synonyms actually adds to your cognitive load by making you choose between them."
Also, Why Ruby Shouldn’t Be Your Next Programming Language (Maybe).
No comments:
Post a Comment