this post was submitted on 19 May 2021
15 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

44919 readers
2156 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
15
Thoughts on suckless software? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 3 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Their software is kinda neat, but I prefer the simplicity of configs more rather than editing and building C. I don't really like their elitist ideology though.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago (1 children)

I don’t really like their elitist ideology though.

I've only heard of the name and not much else, what makes them elitist?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)

From The DWM page

Because dwm is customized through editing its source code, it's pointless to make binary packages of it. This keeps its userbase small and elitist. No novices asking stupid questions. There are some distributions that provide binary packages though.

I don't care for this. Configuration through editing the source code is an engineering decision. I think it's a bit silly, but reasonable people can disagree.

I'm very much of the opinion that when you stop newbing, you start dying, though, so the air of contempt for newbies really turns me off. There also seems to be a 'simplicity scold' tendency where any program that does something they personally don't find useful is bloated, even if there are lots of use cases where it makes perfect sense. (And in talking to some suckless fans 'bloat' seems to include things like localization, which also rubs me the wrong way.)

Some of their stuff is okay as software.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 years ago

This is a perfect summary of my thoughts, here is another quotation from their philosophy page:

We are the home of quality software such as dwm, dmenu, st and plenty of other tools, with a focus on simplicity, clarity and frugality. Our philosophy is about keeping things simple, minimal and usable. We believe this should become the mainstream philosophy in the IT sector. Unfortunately, the tendency for complex, error-prone and slow software seems to be prevalent in the present-day software industry. We intend to prove the opposite with our software projects.

Our project focuses on advanced and experienced computer users. In contrast with the usual proprietary software world or many mainstream open source projects that focus more on average and non-technical end users, we think that experienced users are mostly ignored. This is particularly true for user interfaces, such as graphical environments on desktop computers, on mobile devices, and in so-called Web applications. We believe that the market of experienced users is growing continuously, with each user looking for more appropriate solutions for his/her work style.

Designing simple and elegant software is far more difficult than letting ad-hoc or over-ambitious features obscure the code over time. However one has to pay this price to achieve reliability and maintainability. Furthermore, minimalism results in reasonable and attainable goals. We strive to maintain minimalism and clarity to drive development to completion.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

Actually, yeah, now that I read it, I really disagree with their stance. Why you would want your software to be less accessible is beyond me.

Someone editing the source code when they don't know what they're doing is also a really easy way to introduce subtle bugs or security issues.