I code, therefore I am... nerdy

Maybe Your API Sucks

This goes back to my love/hate relationship with Ruby on Rails. I’m an enterprise .NET developer by day, but I’m trying to be a rails developer by night. I say trying, not because I don’t know rails, but because their documentation sucks. Sure, there are plenty of tutorials for beginners, maybe some for intermediate developers. They are spread out across the internet in a haphazard way. Mostly blog posts showing something cool they found out by perusing the rails codebase or by word of mouth. So their documentation sucks, but I believe it’s something deeper. Maybe your API sucks.

If you’re looking for a long post on how much rails API sucks, you’re going to be sorely disappointed. Remember, I do like rails. It’s an easy framework for anyone to get into. If you’re looking to build simple CRUD applications, rails is hugely productive. Just a simple set of terminal commands and you have a full working application. Hell, no code required. The problem is that all the work is hidden by code generation. Once you have to do anything out of the ordinary, your stuck looking up the documentation.

Why is this so difficult? Because the API isn’t all that great. There are multiple ways to do everything. Without consistency, it’s a matter of memorization, and who has time to memorize when work needs to be done. The problem is compounded when you add in the multitude of gems into your project. All of these work, as black boxes. You just run random commands and something happens. These commands are all different and you hope you don’t get them confused.

Just for a test, I looked up the new “respond_with” command on Google. The first link to actual documentation is the seventh one, and that is with me looking up the exact command. The documentation is just bad. I still have to look up things every time I have my editor open. There are ways to avoid this, though. We could use an editor with code completion, but doesn’t that just hide the underlying problem? What we really need is a better API.

Now, I’m picking on Rails a little bit, and that framework doesn’t deserve all the negativity alone. .NET has the same problems, but it’s hidden behind the “Visual Studio” facade. With intellisense (code completion), I can see the list of methods on a class and descriptions of them at a simple control and space. I admit that I do this quite a bit with new libraries.

If you designed your APIs with consistency in mind, your users wouldn’t need to constantly reference the documentation. Focus on the language (as in spoken) of your API. Speak it out loud and just listen for the sentences that come out. Are you hearing coherent thoughts? Do each of the sentences from your classes and methods sound like they come from the same paper? Your methods define your sentences, your classes define your paragraphs, and your namespaces define your pages.

You’ll find out that when your API makes sense to you, it will start to make sense to your users. Too many APIs try to focus too much on functionality and ignore verbal cohesion. Others go the opposite route and become overly verbose. (I’m looking at you testing frameworks). There is a happy medium to be found.

Just remember, when your users are complaining about your documentation, they are really complaining about your API.