> Software libraries suck. Here's why, in a sentence: they promise to be abstractions, but they end up becoming services.
The file abstraction seems fine. Not having to understand physical wiring of disks, the specific disk manufacturer's wire protocol, and so on is Labor saving. Many of the abstractions don't even force the seek and location concepts but allow "just put my string there" semantics.
The addition abstraction seems fine though if you have a limited length number type there are a few things to consider. Arbitrary precision libraries eliminate those nuances though perhaps move you to others like numbers that cannot fit in available memory. Yet those are rather extreme corner cases.
It's a provocative claim but the universal declaration and the confidence it seems to project seem as weak as some of those abstractions being railed against.
This is not someone making a provocative post claiming that abstractions are bad. It is someone who understands that abstractions are good but claims that it is bad to rely on libraries to solve the need for abstraction.
The file abstraction seems fine. Not having to understand physical wiring of disks, the specific disk manufacturer's wire protocol, and so on is Labor saving. Many of the abstractions don't even force the seek and location concepts but allow "just put my string there" semantics.
The addition abstraction seems fine though if you have a limited length number type there are a few things to consider. Arbitrary precision libraries eliminate those nuances though perhaps move you to others like numbers that cannot fit in available memory. Yet those are rather extreme corner cases.
It's a provocative claim but the universal declaration and the confidence it seems to project seem as weak as some of those abstractions being railed against.