4 ms·

No, I'm saying you should stop and think about what you're doing.

village-idiot 10y ago
Cool. So you're saying because I found bugs I'm not doing my job right? That I'm rushing and not thinking about what I'm doing?
- brandonbloom 10y ago
  You're ignoring the fact that I don't believe clojure.set to be buggy.
  - village-idiot 10y ago
    You're not getting what I'm trying to communicate. Telling people that they're not doing a good job when you don't even know them only pisses people off, and eliminates any chance that they'll agree with you on principle. I was hoping highlighting that would make you realize that all you were saying to me was that I'm not doing a good job, but you didn't seem to get it. Each time I summarized what you said before, you changed your story to make it sound less bad. Ultimately I don't really care that much, this is the Internet and I don't have to interact with you after this. But I'd recommend not doing that to people IRL, they'll resent you.
    - brandonbloom 10y ago
      > Telling people that they're not doing a good job when you don't even know them only pisses people off, and eliminates any chance that they'll agree with you on principle. Funny, that's exactly what the original poster did to the Clojure core team. > Each time I summarized You call it summarizing, I call it mischaracterizing. I stand by the position that if the original poster thinks that clojure.set is bugged: they don't know what they are talking about. That doesn't mean they suck at their job, that means they haven't actually stopped to think about the particularities of those functions.
pdimitar 10y ago
I always found such way of thinking very offensive to your users (programmers in this case). Have we all forgotten the principle "make the minimum amount of WTFs per minute" already? Why is everybody so content with their technology and so quick to look down upon people who aren't familiar with the traps in it? Is it really so wrong for your technology to be easy and painless not only at the entry level, but all the way to middle-high level of professionalism?
- brandonbloom 10y ago
  > Is it really so wrong ... No, that would be _wonderful_. Unfortunately, "easy" is only one dimension along which we must make tradeoffs. Clojure has chosen one point in the design space for input validation vs performance. You're free to have a different preference.
  - pdimitar 10y ago
    Thank you. The only problem here would probaby only be the lack of clear and strong statements about the Clojure philosophy. The C standard for example clearly shows the areas where there is an undefined behaviour and when you can expect the "garbage in, garbage out" behaviour. Is Clojure doing the same? As a relatively mature man and a programmer for me the way a project is maintained is just as important as the ability of the technology itself. This post helped me make a conscious decision to not work with Clojure. If I am gonna learn a new language and technologies I prefer the least possible amount of surprises, because when I inevitably stumble upon them I'll be shamed as "not active enough to research beforehand".
    - brandonbloom 10y ago
      > The C standard for example clearly shows the areas where there is an undefined behaviour and when you can expect the "garbage in, garbage out" behaviour. Is Clojure doing the same? Yes. In fact, this is partly what clojure.spec is about; which the original author calls out as being wrong to prioritize for some unknown reason.
    - 10y ago
nikofeyn 10y ago
i have recently been excited about clojure, but your behavior and responses of other clojure people in this topic has honestly put me off of it. i understand that things are difficult and cljure people apparently work very hard, but the tone and attitude being used is in stark contrast to what i have seen from communities like those of F# and racket. whether you're right or not, it doesn't seem to be a great approach. for people like me, this is a first taste of clojure. just a heads up.
- brandonbloom 10y ago
  My apologies. The community is actually quite welcoming to beginners. For context, these arguments made by the original poster have been around for _years_ in the Clojure community and, frankly, those of us who have also been around for years are tired of hearing the same old complaints. It's particularly annoying because: the core team has made multiple announcements in past days/weeks about improvements to exactly what he's complaining about!
  - nikofeyn 10y ago
    not trying to be dramatic. haha. i am mainly just excited about clojure but this has been a bit of a contentious debate which gives one pause when first getting their feet wet in a new ecosystem.

Cool. So you're saying because I found bugs I'm not doing my job right? That I'm rushing and not thinking about what I'm doing?

brandonbloom 10y ago
You're ignoring the fact that I don't believe clojure.set to be buggy.
- village-idiot 10y ago
  You're not getting what I'm trying to communicate. Telling people that they're not doing a good job when you don't even know them only pisses people off, and eliminates any chance that they'll agree with you on principle. I was hoping highlighting that would make you realize that all you were saying to me was that I'm not doing a good job, but you didn't seem to get it. Each time I summarized what you said before, you changed your story to make it sound less bad. Ultimately I don't really care that much, this is the Internet and I don't have to interact with you after this. But I'd recommend not doing that to people IRL, they'll resent you.
  - brandonbloom 10y ago
    > Telling people that they're not doing a good job when you don't even know them only pisses people off, and eliminates any chance that they'll agree with you on principle. Funny, that's exactly what the original poster did to the Clojure core team. > Each time I summarized You call it summarizing, I call it mischaracterizing. I stand by the position that if the original poster thinks that clojure.set is bugged: they don't know what they are talking about. That doesn't mean they suck at their job, that means they haven't actually stopped to think about the particularities of those functions.

pdimitar 10y ago

I always found such way of thinking very offensive to your users (programmers in this case). Have we all forgotten the principle "make the minimum amount of WTFs per minute" already? Why is everybody so content with their technology and so quick to look down upon people who aren't familiar with the traps in it? Is it really so wrong for your technology to be easy and painless not only at the entry level, but all the way to middle-high level of professionalism?

brandonbloom 10y ago
> Is it really so wrong ... No, that would be _wonderful_. Unfortunately, "easy" is only one dimension along which we must make tradeoffs. Clojure has chosen one point in the design space for input validation vs performance. You're free to have a different preference.
- pdimitar 10y ago
  Thank you. The only problem here would probaby only be the lack of clear and strong statements about the Clojure philosophy. The C standard for example clearly shows the areas where there is an undefined behaviour and when you can expect the "garbage in, garbage out" behaviour. Is Clojure doing the same? As a relatively mature man and a programmer for me the way a project is maintained is just as important as the ability of the technology itself. This post helped me make a conscious decision to not work with Clojure. If I am gonna learn a new language and technologies I prefer the least possible amount of surprises, because when I inevitably stumble upon them I'll be shamed as "not active enough to research beforehand".
  - brandonbloom 10y ago
    > The C standard for example clearly shows the areas where there is an undefined behaviour and when you can expect the "garbage in, garbage out" behaviour. Is Clojure doing the same? Yes. In fact, this is partly what clojure.spec is about; which the original author calls out as being wrong to prioritize for some unknown reason.
  - 10y ago

nikofeyn 10y ago

i have recently been excited about clojure, but your behavior and responses of other clojure people in this topic has honestly put me off of it. i understand that things are difficult and cljure people apparently work very hard, but the tone and attitude being used is in stark contrast to what i have seen from communities like those of F# and racket. whether you're right or not, it doesn't seem to be a great approach. for people like me, this is a first taste of clojure. just a heads up.

brandonbloom 10y ago
My apologies. The community is actually quite welcoming to beginners. For context, these arguments made by the original poster have been around for _years_ in the Clojure community and, frankly, those of us who have also been around for years are tired of hearing the same old complaints. It's particularly annoying because: the core team has made multiple announcements in past days/weeks about improvements to exactly what he's complaining about!
- nikofeyn 10y ago
  not trying to be dramatic. haha. i am mainly just excited about clojure but this has been a bit of a contentious debate which gives one pause when first getting their feet wet in a new ecosystem.