3 ms·
> It reflects the biases of github and stackoverflow which tend to reflect the interests of enthusiasts and web developers. That's a bit oversimplified IMO. SO
by lazyjones 10y ago
> It reflects the biases of github and stackoverflow which tend to reflect the interests of enthusiasts and web developers.
That's a bit oversimplified IMO. SO doesn't reflect "interest in" as much as "having difficulties with". There must be "WAT"-type effects vs. simple, intuitive languages like Go factored in for it to provide useful information regarding popularity. It's a bit like counting hospitalized patients with sports injuries to rank sports activities by popularity.
As for the relevance of github - people are always claiming their language detection is broken and I'd worry about the (intentionally?) skewing effects of moving the core language/library development to github.com like the Go project did.
- mangodrunk 10y ago>SO doesn't reflect "interest in" as much as "having difficulties with". They are using it to have difficulties, so I think it is an interest in. Also, perhaps those that are beginners in things might have more questions, and show that also shows interest. This redmonk has some horrible graphs, and as you said, the method at which they categorize on github is flawed, let alone using stackoverflow or github as indicators being flawed.