What makes software "bloated" in the first place?

What makes software "bloated" in the first place?
Is it all just a big buzzword to shill purposefully functionally crippled software?

Attached: Suckless_logo.svg.png (320x209, 979)

Other urls found in this thread:

vimeo.com/108441214
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Software with more features and uses more RAM/resources than it should.
>kids think legitimate terms are buzzwords and buzzwords are legitimate terms in these crazy days

>uses more resources there it should
This is a bad thing in general, sure, but
>features are bloat
You have been brainwashed by the cat-v cult if you believe this. Doing more in itself is never an issue as long as it still uses little resources and the codebase is relatively small. Why would you ever want software that does less?

>bloat
>legitimate term
It has no clear definition and it's repeated non stop by autists. It's literally a buzzword.

>Why would you ever want software that does less?
It's about it doing only what it should do and nothing more. If you want it to do something else get whatever else that does that thing and does only that thing etc.

Otherwise you'll end up with 10 different software that you use for different tasks but they all have features that mash together for no reason at all, that's bloat.

for me it's many things/features that doesn't needed

More features THAN IT SHOULD. Learn to read, kid. If your fucking browser suddenly adds some bullshit garbage to it *coughFIREFOXhackwheeze*, it's bloated.

Jesus fuck, kids.

Where do you draw the line?

More features than it should or that I need and more resource demanding than generally necessary

Should a window manager also detect keyboard input?

Throwing hardware at a problem that could have been fixed in software.

Take your meds, grandpa.

how easy it is to get full understanding of given software and its implementation
how easy it is to add/change its functionality or refactor
if it uses dependencies, how much do they do for the program and how much of effort to ^^^ they pull in

the nice measurement is - if you already had a good knowledge of how it works and the program would disappear, how long would it take you to recreate it from scratch? 1 week? good. 1 month? eh, some problem are inevitably hard. 1 year? you are swimming in shit already

>More features THAN IT SHOULD.
According to who? This line is a lot harder to draw than you might think. Sometimes people reinvent the wheel because the wheels that already exist are shit.

>Sometimes people reinvent the wheel because the wheels that already exist are shit.

More often than not, they do so because not doing so makes you "not a real programmer", noy not because of any practical benefit.

Usually it's done because commercial software companies don't share code.

You've never seen how many FOSS projects rewrite their own containers every time from scratch, have you?

anything beyond basic functioning or spaghetti locs

And? How do you measure the supposed true resource requirements of a program? Do you eyeball it?

Above is why the "anti-bloat" movement in tech is smoke and mirrors, and autism.
Mathematically speaking, programs can be measured at least in two ways: featureset and resource usage. When one tends to zero, the other does necessarily stay constant. It's okay to make sacrifices to achieve a good balance.

That just assumes everything is open source and available for any program to interface, which is false. I don't live in dreamland, I want working software.

>subjective
>subjective
>subjective

If Linux disappeared, it would take about 10 years to make something that even boots an x86 CPU.

>it would take about 10 years to make something that even boots an x86 CPU
holy shit no. making freertos clone is matter of few weeks, making some xv6 clone is few months.
>subjective
not quite. size of documentation and size of code divided by reading speed gives you quantifiable very optimistic lower bound. humans have a limited mental capacity of things they are able to keep in mind/focus. just because there are subtle differences between individuals, does it make it subjective? no.
ofc the line between where specific programmer failed to understand something and when something is hard to understand is not exact, but calling it subjective is a mistake.

It is quite subjective. I'd rather read 5k lines of shell script than 1000 lines of kernel drivers. Other than that, having a giant web of dependencies between programs means less space for change and promotes code rot. I'd hate having my programs break because someone somewhere changed the order of CLI arguments.

S

For instance, there are a ton of relatively simple pieces of software which could be implemented in

Using more resources than it needs to (memory, space on disk, etc.)

Completely arbitrary, otherwise I would have to stop complaining at some point.

Unironically: electron = bloat
If you think otherwise you should consider to kys
/thread

but the gnormies need a gui made from a web browser to use dd

>>kids think legitimate terms are buzzwords and buzzwords are legitimate terms in these crazy days
Who are you quoting, newfag?

vimeo.com/108441214

> I'd hate having my programs break because someone somewhere changed the order of CLI arguments.
Same goes for communication protocols, function interfaces and every communication barrier ever.