203
You probably don't need GraphQL (mxstbr.com)
submitted 8 months ago by testeronious@lemmy.world to c/programming@programming.dev
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 7 points 8 months ago

...by someone who didn’t really deeply understand the HTTP specification, or at least couldn’t really articulate why they needed a new tool that used less...

Thousand yard stare at SOAP

Yo dawg, I heard you like XML over HTTP so I put XML in HTTP in your XML over HTTP.

So many technologies doing crap that plain old HTTP already does:

  • name a resource: URL
  • discover verbs for a resource: OPTIONS
  • execute a verb: the actual request
  • define a response type: Headers
[-] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 2 points 8 months ago

Thousand yard stare at SOAP

Yo dawg, I heard you like XML over HTTP so I put XML in HTTP in your XML over HTTP.

Made me spit my drink, laughing. Thank you. Very true.

this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024
203 points (97.7% liked)

Programming

17674 readers
42 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
snowe@programming.dev
Ategon@programming.dev
MaungaHikoi@lemmy.nz