4 ms·

Isn't it possible to choose the best tool AND get to work? Isn't it our responsibility, as software engineers, to ensure that those who pay for our services get

by iagooar 10y ago

Isn't it possible to choose the best tool AND get to work? Isn't it our responsibility, as software engineers, to ensure that those who pay for our services get the best bang for their buck? That includes choosing a programming language that actually helps developing new features faster, while guaranteeing that the system is available, robust and maintenance costs are low. Choosing a language that makes these things difficult, is a poor choice. We should not accept subpar languages to be used just because.

jwdunne 10y ago
You're right. If you have the freedom to choose the best tool, I think you absolutely should. I think the problem lies in the fact many programmers don't have the luxury of making those decisions. I imagine if one of those programmers refused to use the mandated tools, they'd get the sack. Many of those programmers, again, don't have the leg room to handle that. Plus, I don't think any employer would look favourably on "I got sacked because I refused to use language X because language Y is superior". I know that isn't the kind of attitude to work I would appreciate. The companies that allow freedom of choice in tools and languages are perhaps the best companies to work for. Unfortunately, those companies hire the best programmers in the first place, or at least set the bar with that in mind. Most programmers, including myself, are not of this calibre.
- bobsam 10y ago
  Counterpoint: Programmers don't choose the best language, they choose the language they are comfortable using. Source: at a previous job we had a "use whatever tool you want, just get the job done" policy. After two years we had everything from Perl to JavaScript in the same project. Edit: ... and this project was a desktop application!
  - jwdunne 10y ago
    This is true, from my experience. When I'm screening candidates, I often ask them to solve a problem in their language of choice. They choose PHP, even though I know the same problem solution can be expressed far clearer and shorter in Ruby. Perhaps we are unearthing various kinds of choices i.e choices for best fit vs best convenience. Perhaps that's a case of engineering vs something other.
    - woah 10y ago
      Despite its checkered past, isn't php these days a more powerful language than ruby?
      - wtetzner 10y ago
        That's the first time I think I've heard that. I've heard many times that PHP is much better than it used to be, but in what ways is it more powerful than Ruby?
        fiddlerwoaroof 10y ago
        One nice feature is that it is optionally typed (php 5.6 had this for classes and arrays php 7 added support for specifying primitive types.) Also, the newer parts of the language such as the object system and the presence of closures and first class functions are almost pleasant to work with: for the most part, the annoyances come from the old stuff
      - jwdunne 10y ago
        Not at all. I abused Ruby's metaprogramming capabilities to build a small functional language with operators. I monkey patched symbols with operator overloading to add the typical functional operators such as composition (using * since . isn't possible). I created operators for piping, partial application, etc. Terrible abuses that probably reduced inter-library and future compatibility to 0. I don't think that would be possible in any way with PHP without PECL (there is an extension for operator overloading magic methods) whereas it is with Ruby out the box. If the language allows me to abuse it in such a way more than another, I reckon it holds more expressive power. Case in point: Lisp.
      - sanderjd 10y ago
        I'm really curious about this! I don't know much about recent versions of PHP - what do you think makes it more powerful than Ruby?
  - eeZah7Ux 10y ago
    > Programmers don't choose the best language bad programmers do that. As professionals, we should refuse to implement something in the wrong language and allow somebody else to do the job.

by iagooar 10y ago

jwdunne 10y ago

You're right. If you have the freedom to choose the best tool, I think you absolutely should. I think the problem lies in the fact many programmers don't have the luxury of making those decisions. I imagine if one of those programmers refused to use the mandated tools, they'd get the sack. Many of those programmers, again, don't have the leg room to handle that. Plus, I don't think any employer would look favourably on "I got sacked because I refused to use language X because language Y is superior". I know that isn't the kind of attitude to work I would appreciate. The companies that allow freedom of choice in tools and languages are perhaps the best companies to work for. Unfortunately, those companies hire the best programmers in the first place, or at least set the bar with that in mind. Most programmers, including myself, are not of this calibre.

bobsam 10y ago
Counterpoint: Programmers don't choose the best language, they choose the language they are comfortable using. Source: at a previous job we had a "use whatever tool you want, just get the job done" policy. After two years we had everything from Perl to JavaScript in the same project. Edit: ... and this project was a desktop application!
- jwdunne 10y ago
  This is true, from my experience. When I'm screening candidates, I often ask them to solve a problem in their language of choice. They choose PHP, even though I know the same problem solution can be expressed far clearer and shorter in Ruby. Perhaps we are unearthing various kinds of choices i.e choices for best fit vs best convenience. Perhaps that's a case of engineering vs something other.
  - woah 10y ago
    Despite its checkered past, isn't php these days a more powerful language than ruby?
    - wtetzner 10y ago
      That's the first time I think I've heard that. I've heard many times that PHP is much better than it used to be, but in what ways is it more powerful than Ruby?
      - fiddlerwoaroof 10y ago
        One nice feature is that it is optionally typed (php 5.6 had this for classes and arrays php 7 added support for specifying primitive types.) Also, the newer parts of the language such as the object system and the presence of closures and first class functions are almost pleasant to work with: for the most part, the annoyances come from the old stuff
    - jwdunne 10y ago
      Not at all. I abused Ruby's metaprogramming capabilities to build a small functional language with operators. I monkey patched symbols with operator overloading to add the typical functional operators such as composition (using * since . isn't possible). I created operators for piping, partial application, etc. Terrible abuses that probably reduced inter-library and future compatibility to 0. I don't think that would be possible in any way with PHP without PECL (there is an extension for operator overloading magic methods) whereas it is with Ruby out the box. If the language allows me to abuse it in such a way more than another, I reckon it holds more expressive power. Case in point: Lisp.
    - sanderjd 10y ago
      I'm really curious about this! I don't know much about recent versions of PHP - what do you think makes it more powerful than Ruby?
- eeZah7Ux 10y ago
  > Programmers don't choose the best language bad programmers do that. As professionals, we should refuse to implement something in the wrong language and allow somebody else to do the job.