We were just pretending to be retarded

I don't get why processing on request should be better then preprocessing and serving static files
does werc even has some cache?

>a few months ago
>Jow Forums totally all over that page, everyone likes it and agrees

>now
>everyone shits on them and dislikes it

What the fuck is going on?

Attached: 1519514331916.gif (500x382, 167K)

summer

lol, cat-v has gotten shat on here since forever, although have always been plenty of pathetic urielites and suckmosters lurking about (for example)

About half of his shit is good. Another half is bullshit. His personal views are good for ironically agreeing with, at best.

Suckless is like the good parts of Uriel's ranting desu.

he killed himself.

Yes, I know. The only philosophically sound decision he made.

fpbps, and indeed they are

that made me chuckle

I have no clue. I literally just saw "powered by werc" at the bottom, clicked to find out more and was horrified.

But it integrates semenlessly!

Holy shit why dod you point it out. I will never sleep again.

I'm glad I'm not the only one fucking amazed at how convoluted werc is.
You could literally make the same website with just the werc css file and html.

>worshiping an autist so brain damaged he killed himself
lmfao

t. anally-devastated node.js shills who drink Juicero

that whole shithole of a website is just a bunch of faggot basedboys sucking each other off while watching Bernie speeches.

Attached: 1521330773054.png (988x1059, 143K)

>Scientists: Richard Feynman, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, Ken Thompson.
>Friedman
>Hayek
>scientists

It's always been a meme passed around by people who mindlessly spout out "muh Unix philosophy!" and other nonsense.

Attached: 1445973840947.png (500x700, 417K)

cr.yp.to/publicfile.html + any static site generator > werc
making ssg on your own is just 100 loc or filling template with git data and running existing markdown converter and static file server is so much more reusable

You wish, urielfag.

Ever been to the 9front and related IRC channels? Pure cancer.

No, mind telling me some good memes they spawned?

t. got insulted in #cat-v

if anything, they're the opposite

Stop sucking Uriel's dead cock at once.

No.

>haven't found anything comfier than dwm+dmenu+slstatus+st
>disagree with 80% of everything Uriel said
I'm conflicted

t. brain damaged neckbeard that uses 9front coreutils and obscure tools and software to be cool and contrarian

Attached: 1525553183493.jpg (651x793, 69K)

Just because you hate their creators doesn't mean you shouldn't use the tools they made. Good tools are good tools.

>if anything, they're the opposite

lmao. says the hipsters using shell cgi in 20 fucking 18. you people are so fucking contrarian, you've gone beyond php/python cgi bullshit and went to levels worse than that.

Other than Uriel, is there any reason to hate any of the other creators?

Their definition of what is harmful and what isn't is arbitrary at best and contrarian at worst. Not to mention sometimes based on FUD, like the fake interview with Stroustrup on cat-v.
Other than software, everything else (politics, cultural preservation, etc.) seems unironically written by edgy angry high school students, like said, with an incredibly superficial and narrow-minded understanding of the subjects they are talking about.

uriel didn't make any of that shit
his "masterpiece" is werc

He was a strong advocate for suckless and presumably they acknowledged him as a valuable member (if his quotes page is anything to go by). That's what I meant.

>you can like the software even if you hate the creators bro
>Yeah but why should I hate the creators
>their views on software are shit bro
Good argument.

Also, I thought the "considered harmful" meme was isolated to Uriel, suckless as a project just says unapproved stuff "sucks more". I also haven't seen much political stuff on suckless.org, who else apart from Uriel is into that shit?

holy fuck you can't make this shit up

harmful.cat-v.org/films/

There is no contradiction in what I said.

what got me conflicted was sqlite and ssh

Sqlite is impressively useful, compact and reliable tool. For all purposed it acts like black box with well defined input and outputs, doesn't mess with your system and does one thing and does it well. Great example of such tool.
But it's implementation is massive. I know it is said to have more testing code than the working code, but it contains full sql engine, byte code compiler and interpreter, file mapping/paging/caching. No human could rewrite it in a month from scratch, it's too complex to get a full understanding of it's design and implementation. Hell even BerkeleyDB is too complex.
The conflict for me is that sqlite, while being so good, is the opposite of unix philosophy. It uses flat binary files to store structured data, does many things that filesystem and OS should handle instead (although less than traditional server as it out-sources access permissions) and SQL itself is pretty big DSL which is mostly overkill for not so complex CRUD. Cat-v throws some alternatives that targets (Tutorial D, pq, BigTable, plain old hierarchical filesystems), but if you compare them - SQLite wins in reliability, practicality and familiarity, it's obviously better choice.

SSH is similar, I have not yet seen anyone who complains about SSH to provide as good replacement except for very specific purposes. It's secure, well audited (hopefully, I'm skeptical about the OpenBSD claims of auditing their system but SSH as standalone project gets tons of external attention) and again - familar and everywhere. But hell the PTY model makes the implementation annoying as fuck, brings in the most complex parts and issues such as server not recognizing the terminfo of client. It's not a simple remote RPC model with shell on application layer, the obsolete tty model is integrated in it.

Attached: evil.png (431x201, 14K)

as a conclusion, I've found pursuing simplicity of design and implementation to be evil (not the idea of software simplicity itself) and avoiding fanaticism, it will only spoil you

>Avatar is best film ever gaiz i swar

Attached: brainlet2.jpg (645x773, 56K)

I didn't say it was good; I just said his criticism of it was fucking garbage. Avatar09 is "considered harmful" because he doesn't like it. Ok buddy. Harmful.

>complaining about Avatar being literally Pocahontas
>no mentions of every Disney and Pixar movies having stolen story

I think the thing about SQL engines is that they're basically their own OSes in a way. Except nobody runs mainframes anymore so you can't make a separate OS for a particular application, so it gets packaged as traditional software and simply implements its stuff in its own black box. This leads to stuff like its own internal "filesystem" appearing as flat binary files to the outside, and the implementation being massive.

With the spread of virtualization, maybe a bare metal RDBMS that would behave more like a traditional OS and allow you to peak at its internal, and in general behave in a much more modular way, would be feasible. But nobody is going to make one because it's such a huge undertaking, and the benefits are mainly philosophical given that current systems work perfectly well.

This.
Software "simplicity and minimalism" should be a means to an end: quality, lightweight and high performance software. Not an end in itself.

imagine being so fucking seething because someone called a piece of shitware you use "bloated" and "complex"

just fucking move on

simplicity is desirable because mo complexity mean mo problems, simple as. of course it's a means to an end, no one said otherwise. no one writes a piece of software just to be simple, the write it to do something.

"Considered harmful" is an old programming meme you fucking twat, it just means "I'm not keen on it". Don't get sand up your cunt.

The problem as seen from uriel's perspective was that (1) SQL is a shitty query language (his recommendation of Tutorial D is a bit like an improved SQL) and (2) the implementations are insanely large and subject to constant feature creep, making them a big playground for bugs. I don't understand why people feel invalidated and personally attacked just because someone doesn't like some database software they use. It's objectively true that SQL database implementations are massive.

>SQL is a shitty query language
That's very fair
>the implementations are insanely large, making them a big playground for bugs.
But what I'm saying is that this is natural and inherent for a well optimized RDBMS, not some fault of the implementations. You're not gonna complain that a production grade* OS is too big, for example. For a database, you're basically implementing what's equivalent to a specialty file system (more like data system, but semantics), plus a full language interpreter, and then you have to optimize the SHIT out of both of those, and also various bits and bobs like managing connections, taking care of access permissions, and stuff (I'm calling them bits and bobs in comparison to the core tasks, but each of those - when implemented to a level of robustness suitable for production - is already probably complex enough to be considered bloat from a minimalism point of view).

So that's why all the "bloated" systems perform much better than the "minimalist" ones. They actually mostly do important stuff. When your suckless window manager has limited mouse support and doesn't come with any visual effect/animations nor any typical DE utilities, that means you have to find and setup your own status bar and then you can use your keyboard efficiently. When your "suckless" dbms has a primitive engine and stores data in plaintext files "to reduce complexity", that means your queries start taking an order of magnitude longer and your high-load applications - the ones requiring a few hundred thousand database operations per second, on tables a couple billion records large - slow to a completely unusable crawl.

*by that I mean stuff like TempleOS don't qualify. And even then TempleOS is 80k or 100k lines (I forget), but that's already way way beyond what a typical "unbloated" program would be.
As a side note, web browsers suffer a similar problem - there simply isn't an unbloated way to parse and run efficiently the entire modern HTML+JS standard.