4 ms·

If you remove the value judgments from your comment, you and I are saying the same thing. Many developers say they want to "get something working quickly", wher

If you remove the value judgments from your comment, you and I are saying the same thing. Many developers say they want to "get something working quickly", where "working" means "executing and performing some simple I/O, etc". Some developers don't value that stage, and prefer to develop until a piece of code is ready for wide-scale production. And that difference in values is just fine. Lattner used rhetorical slight of hand to assert, in effect, "you 'working quickly' developers need first to adopt my values; only then can you be admitted to the conversation." C.f. Yegge on liberal-vs-conservative developers. [1] Lattner (along with you) is adopting a position towards the conservative end of the spectrum, which is cool. What's not cool is gaslighting the existence of a liberal perspective. [1] https://plus.google.com/u/0/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSKeg4vQtz https://plus.google.com/u/0/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSK...

handle0174 8y ago
This Latner quote was excerpted from his response to "What's the sales pitch for adopting Swift now?"
blub 8y ago
Is there any proof that the liberal perspective is able to produce software of sufficient quality? All the safety-critical development standards take a very conservative approach, especially in respect to development speed. A program that executes and performs some I/O is a very very low bar to pass. The next step is not being ready for wide-scale production, in fact the IEEE Software Engineering Body of Knowledge aims to define the many steps required for that and it's a lot of them. Developing by the seat of ones pants is fine for personal projects, but not for publicly used software. And why should what developers "want" be the main criteria that should be used to choose programming languages? It's certainly important that developers are able to extract some satisfaction from their work, but that doesn't mean we should sacrifice other important goals just for the personal comfort of developers.

handle0174 8y ago

This Latner quote was excerpted from his response to "What's the sales pitch for adopting Swift now?"

blub 8y ago

Is there any proof that the liberal perspective is able to produce software of sufficient quality? All the safety-critical development standards take a very conservative approach, especially in respect to development speed. A program that executes and performs some I/O is a very very low bar to pass. The next step is not being ready for wide-scale production, in fact the IEEE Software Engineering Body of Knowledge aims to define the many steps required for that and it's a lot of them. Developing by the seat of ones pants is fine for personal projects, but not for publicly used software. And why should what developers "want" be the main criteria that should be used to choose programming languages? It's certainly important that developers are able to extract some satisfaction from their work, but that doesn't mean we should sacrifice other important goals just for the personal comfort of developers.