@faraday said in What is out there? Hard and soft codebases of choice.:
I've struggled with the same things with Ares, so I completely sympathize. Using modern tools means using a patchwork of stuff. That's just the way modern software tools are.
It doesn't have to be, it's just that the broken cruft won the adoption wars (like it seemingly always does).
There are languages and environments out there that are complete, integrated front-to-back-end stacks that don't require the wobbling pile of shit that is conventional web development. Off the top of my head there's the web stack in SWI-Prolog, there's a language/runtime called "Oma" or something like that?, there's MIT's Ur/Web stuff, there's … well, suffice it to say there's a huge variety of approaches to avoiding the dog's breakfast that is "modern" web development.
But …
Programmers, for all their posturing over "bleeding edge" fetishes, are at their core so conservative they make the Family Values Party look like pinko commies. I've seen "rock star" programmers--not self-identified as such, but identified as such by colleagues!--recoil from a language because it didn't use curly braces. The most popular "developer platform" is a warmed-over remake of '70s technology (that was itself a pared-to-the-bone remake of '60s technology).
There isn't a 1960s methodology or a 1970s language design that programmers have seen that they don't embrace wholeheartedly as the One True Way of doing things. And they'd far rather incrementally add one more steaming pile of dung onto an existing steaming pile of dung than start to work with, you know, something that isn't horseshit. (Evidence: C++, Java, and C#.)
This is why web development is such a shit experience and why web apps are such broken shit apps.
But really, especially in the hobby space, it makes little sense to follow the ultraconservative proclivities of "professionals". You'd think in the hobby space it would make more sense to try out things that could be fun. But apparently you'd think wrong…
@Roz said in What is out there? Hard and soft codebases of choice.:
That is, I don't think anyone said it was "for professional programmers only".
Sorry, I should have been clearer in my reply. But it was stuff like this:
@WTFE said in What is out there? Hard and soft codebases of choice.:
Now, again, if the target market is professional programmers who want a professional (where "professional" is defined as "senselessly complicated for no good reason: cf. enterprise") development environment for their pretendy-fun-time-text-game hobby, then Evennia probably hits close to a sweet spot.
If, however, the market is broader and includes hobbyists it has, IMO, fallen far short of what's needed to appeal there.
"Targeted at" =/= "exclusively usable by". On my desk at this very moment I have about a half-dozen pieces of kit targeted at electrical engineers. (These are: a bench power supply, an oscilloscope, a logic analyzer, a spectrum analyzer, a spiffy digital multimeter, an arbitrary waveform generator and a LoRa development module for the record. OK, that's seven, not half-a-dozen. Call it a baker's half-dozen.) I'm not an electrical engineer. This doesn't stop me from both owning and regularly using these items. (Well, OK, I don't own the spectrum analyzer. Those things are FUCKING EXPENSIVE! It's on loan.)
Nobody (sane), however, would disagree with me that these things are anything but targeted at engineers. The fact that a non-engineer is capably using them is quite irrelevant.
Oh, and at home I have all of the above (sans spectrum analyzer) and a few dozen pieces more (including more JTAG/SWD adapters than I know what to do with).
This is the context in which I meant "the target market…".