# http4k


01/30/2019, 7:58 PM
I wanted to mention ( as most comments tend to be focused on issues/problems rather then whats NOT a problem) I find the entire http4k project quite exemplary in both function and style/form. At first glance (long time ago) my impression was that it must be deficient because the the code-base was too small and the style - simple and elegant -- to the point I was skeptical it would actually work in 'the real world' I have verified to my satisfaction that I was totally wrong. The apparent simplicity is actually elegance -- a direct representative of the overall design architecture. So much so that I still have a hard time figuring out how to use it -- it is so different form 'conventional' style/architecture that my instincts of where and what to look for are worthless I dont know what to suggest or how exactly to improve that -- just a comment that it is difficult to grasp how to use the various pieces and how they fit together -- because it was designed and implemented so well -- but differently -- I will speculate many people have a hard time 'Seeing the Obvious' -- I do ... but when I do -- its worth it> So thank you -- not just for a great library but also an inspiration and example of excellent engineering we could all strive to follow as a model of something done well.
💯 5
😊 3
Thanks. Suggestion/Oppionion Do NOT worry for one second about insulting the reader. Its useful to sepreate 'basic' from 'advanced' but IMHO the basic stuff is 1000x more crucial to detail. 'Advanced' stuff is well served by example/source like the cook book. But 'basic' stuff -- not so much. If you dont have a solid understanding of the motive and design you need a LOT of handholding to figure out even 'trivial' things. Once you do, I find people have little issue simply skipping over the stuff they know already. I dont recall ever (30+yrs) of anyone who had problems with documentation being to basic -- as long as that wasn't ALL of it . THe more 'advanced' one gets the more useful its to go over the basics occasionlly 'as if' you didnt know it-- you' ll discover you didn't really. this, IMHO, is the difficult issue with technology and documentation of any sort -- by the time your are expert at anything you have forgotten what it was like when you were not. This implicitly makes it difficult for yourself and others because so many things seem 'so obvious' that you dont even thihnk about them -- let alone consider documenting them or questioning your belive
Every day someone is weaned off of Spring-Addiction, Angels Sing. Seriously (in addition) ... A major factor which attracted me to Kotlin is that I felt like I did when I first learned "C", and when I learned early Unix and had seen some of the source code. In direct comparison at the time to languages like Assembly aand Fortran, and to OS's like VMS and IBM 360 -- a markedly similar feeling of wonder -- that something could be simultaneously 'simpler' -- or at least appear that way 🙂 -- yet neither missing anything I thought important and in fact adding value by means of unification of data models. almost 40 years FF through generations of evolution, advancement, complication, rebellion to complication creating its own cycle of complexity ... where the 'New Normal' is both so complex its incomprehensible and simultaneously too simplistic to function properly. ( spring / JSON , modern OS's etc) Kotlin brings back the same clarity I got from C and early unix -- for me at least. Its good to see others sharing a similar view -- maybe we have another good decade ahead before the cycle comes around and we rebel against the monsters we have made.
💯 1