3 ms·
Unfortunately the ultimate implication of this argument is to largely rehash the same old ideas and biases that most programmers are mentally comfortable with,
by vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Unfortunately the ultimate implication of this argument is to largely rehash the same old ideas and biases that most programmers are mentally comfortable with, and never really push any boundaries. This is the vicious cycle we're stuck in now, and it must be broken eventually.
- AnimalMuppet 11y agoI didn't say that there was no place for languages to single-mindedly follow their own idea of purity. I said that doing so and popularity were often at odds. There's nothing wrong with your language following your ideas to the logical extreme, and seeing where it leads. There's nothing wrong with saying, "This approach solves some of these problems that other languages have." But what bugs me is the people who think that their language is The One Right Way(TM), and everybody else is too stupid to see it, when the actual reality is that their language just isn't all that they think it is in real-world use. All in all, I think that the majority of programmers aren't as stupid as you think they are. I think that they'll learn a language that offers them real advantages for what they're trying to do. They won't learn every language that comes along, though. They won't learn every language that gets hype for a while. They need to see that it will actually gain them something before they invest in it.
- justaaron 11y agothey might not necessarily have something to immediately gain if all tooling in a given field has already bent to the will of a different paradigm... in web-land, we are only at the level of REST api's now, after years of bloat like SOAP xml/rpc stuff... sometimes people have to get fed-up with an entire way of doing things before we see significant change...