Re: [dev] Minimalist software. Should I care?

From: <>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2023 15:54:59 -0400

> Hi all,
> I'd like to share some small X11 utilities that I've developed and have
> been using in my daily setup. The utilities are all fairly small in
> size and requires only typical X libraries.
> sxcs
> ====
> This is a simple color picker and magnifier. My issue with all other
> existing minimal color pickers were that due to no magnification,
> picking out specific pixels was fairly difficult.
> The usage is simple, you launch the program and pick a color. The result
> will be output to stdout in tab separated RGB, HSL and HEX format.
> Repo:
> SLoC: ~628
> Dependencies: Xlib, libXcursor
> sxot
> ====
> This one is a *very minimal* screenshot tool. I wrote this when I
> realized that other cli screenshot tools (scrot, maim) do way too much.
> sxot on the other hand is meant to follow the unix philosophy - it
> simply takes a screenshot and outputs a binary ppm image to stdout.
> Any other functionalities are supposed to be handled by more specialized
> tools. E.g sx4 (see below) for selection, optipng to convert to png,
> xclip for copying to clipboard etc.
> Repo:
> SLoC: ~251
> Dependencies: Xlib, libXfixes
> sx4
> ===
> This one is a selection tool. It outputs the selection rectangle to
> stdout which can then be used for other purposes, such as screenshoting
> or screen-recording a specific area.
> Repo:
> SLoC: ~500
> Dependencies: Xlib, libXext
> ---
> And that's all. Feel free to report any bugs, send bug-fixes, request
> additional features (within the project's scope) etc.
> - NRK
> Just bear with me on this one, this is not a bait or a
> troll, I promise. I genuinely fell very confused.
> What would be the point of using minimalist software if
> bloated and excessively complex programs completely satisfy
> all my needs? I am not the kind of person that works
> directly with hardware, but it's not like I use my system
> only as a bootloader for a web browser either. It's just
> that my current workflow feels pretty complete to me.
> Take LaTeX, for example. I do all of my LaTeX in TeXstudio
> and, frankly, I'm satisfied with it. Autocompletion is there
> by default and there are many shortcuts that I don't need to
> set up myself. I simply use the all of this.
> You could say that TeXstudio is pretty bloated and isn't
> that flexible in terms of configuring and using it in
> conjunction with other applications. And you'd be right. But
> if I'll try to use more minimalist software like Neovim I
> would spend an endless amount of time configuring and
> patching all the features I now take for granted. And even
> if I succeed, there will certainly be a time when I would
> need some feature I haven't thought of in advance (a need to
> use a debugger inside Nvim, idk) and I would have to either
> avoid this feature for the time being or abandon anything I
> am currently doing and try to search information on how to
> integrate this thing into my system and into my workflow.
> If I had used one of the bloated programs I probably could
> have found a solution in one of the menus after reading few
> Stack Overflow answers. But with Neovim I'd have to first
> find the program that would be suitable for what I try to
> achieve, then I'd have to read many lines or pages of
> documentation, after that I'd have to implement that thing
> and only then I'd be able to use the thing.
> Such minimalism just seems unpractical to me. Maybe I have
> the wrong mindset when it comes to these things.
> I do love using more niche and minimalist programs. I like
> when things are small, simple and understandable. I really
> like C over C++, Rust or anything else exactly for that
> reason. It's just makes computers fun, comfortable and cute
> (idk how else to describe it). But am not fond of endlessly
> configuring these things before they become even
> semi-practical. I really don't know what to think about all
> of this. What do you have to say about this?
> --
> Nikita

It's quite simple for me (and should be for you IF YOU CARE for these):
Minimalistic code means lesser surface to create, work around, deal with,

Many many things does it mean, for programmers, but for regular users it can
mean just these:
- greater security by default because of lesser attack surface
(security-workarounds are shit, security hardening like OpenBSD does it is a
must unless you aren't connected to internet/live in a bunker)

- if it does, and it should: have less dependency, which means that software
requiress less hassle meaning easily portable to other hardware/operating

- faster compile times (if you compile software yourself, no you do not have
to be a programmer to do that)

- it's cute

- if you ever have a question that nobody can answer or you want to learn,
source code is easily understandable as opposed to GNU software lmao

- it doesn't require as much time and effort you might not even want (by a
handfull of persons, not in general broad spectrum of energy usage, it's
among little utilities), meaning it's more fun for the programmer, as well as
could be written faster, and as such, defeats the whole bloated messy,
and STUPID (no, seriously, anti-cheats are proprietary shit that work around
shit and fix NOTHING, anti-cheats should be IF statement checks on
for networked games to avoid cheating), in other words: complexity ==

- you'll realizze you don't ned a book, a forum, message the creator,
etc., for
easy questions to be answered, such as "why is this glitching/broken, when it
worked yesterday?"

I could go on and on, but then it would be no fun for you, try it out and
see for yourself ;)
Are you a girl? Weird (weird is good these days) .
Received on Thu Jul 06 2023 - 21:54:59 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Jul 06 2023 - 22:00:10 CEST