Hacker News Reader

Comment by raverbashing | Hacker News Reader

Don't worry, the docs and APIs/libraries for AWS are just as bad

Boto3 is eye-watering bad. Boto2 was written by someone with some knowledge of Python and usability. Boto3 is just "automatically generated" from their API

It is not good. It is bad. The structure makes no sense. The API can be described as "the minimum that works".

View on HN

I'm not here to defend AWS but I'm a bit puzzled by your comment about the Boto3 doco. Here's some sample usage for instance which clearly is something more than "automatically generated" https://boto3.amazonaws.com/v1/documentation/api/latest/guid... .

Not the docs, the library code is (for the most part) automatically generated

This is actually a good example of how the thing works, you have to use MessageBody as an argument name to send the message. Or use the Entries argument

Those names and that usage style are far from Pythonic

They map to the underlying JSON calls that are made. It's like they took the top-level keys of the JSON and made them kwargs in the Python.

I believe they meant that the API bindings themselves are autogenerated - which I think is pretty likely given how baffling and un-pythonic some of decisions in boto3 are.

You're right that much of the documentation clearly isn't auto-generated. Of the many Amazon APIs and tools I've worked with, boto3 among the better of them in terms of documentation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com