|
|
|
|
|
by DwnVoteHoneyPot
1261 days ago
|
|
My read on this is they just wanted to cut out Ruby and do everything in Node. That's fine as a decision, but rest of the article feels like just trying to justify it after the fact. Like someone at the top decided, now lets pretend it's a good decision. As you mentioned, if they're not OK with CLI, they could refactor in Ruby. The whole "embracing functional programming" and MVC architecture (i think Rails when i hear MVC) as reasons to go to Node, and not Ruby, is nuts. If they were worried about dependencies, they'd use Rust or Go as they mentioned. |
|
Just how complex is your command line app if you need to have multiple transitive versions of the same library?
Coming from the same company that is so heavily invested in Ruby that they contributed to a new JIT for it (YJIT), built a static type checking layer (sorbet) for it, and built a module system that prevents you sharing code between those modules (packwerk), etc.
Unrelated but it is reminding me of my attempt to integrate with Zapier. Zapier doesn't document an API anywhere, you have to use its 'CLI app'. The CLI app of course just calls undocumented HTTP APIs behind the scenes.