|
|
|
|
|
by bombcar
70 days ago
|
|
If all the "popular" solutions are complex, it means the problem domain is complex. You either are doomed to reimplement and rediscover the complexity on your own, or you change your requirements to fit a narrower problem domain to avoid (some of) the complexity. |
|
I'm not saying that there weren't reasons to add these functions to the protocol, but if your aim is minimalism, then you can do _much_ better, and I think there is a real benefit in having a bare bones protocol that anyone could implement in many contexts.