3 ms·

I don’t think a serious study of the issue can be done. Code review is the most difficult part of the development process (and a major advantage of open source)

by ryacko 7y ago

I don’t think a serious study of the issue can be done. Code review is the most difficult part of the development process (and a major advantage of open source), and businesses want to code the MVP as fast as possible without the competition copying them. The ideal language isn’t the most efficient language but one that is fast to develop, and leaves a possibility to optimize later. I would think languages like Nim and Rust are best in that regard, and more recently JavaScript.

moron4hire 7y ago
I agree on your comment about "most efficient language". And I agree that the business-interest is micro-focused on monthly-cost versus yearly- or even multi-yearly-cost. I think those two things are at odds with each other. I think a lot of technical decisions are being made on a short-sighted business level. And I think a lot of people on the technology side have inculcated too much of the business message. I'm not arguing against ever using languages like Python or Ruby or PHP or whatever. But I think a lot of people make assumptions that their language choice doesn't matter. In a lot of the same ways that building an entire economy on carbon fuels was "easy", it only worked because of externalities. As a profession, we need to be taking a longer view of our craft. I don't think that it is true that it's impossible to make C++ secure. I don't think that it's true that--say--Java and C# are less productive than--say--Python or Ruby. On a surface level, certain things are easier, but once you start digging into real problems, there isn't much difference. And experienced developers in any language will be far beyond that surface syntax. I just think that, as a profession, we have our priorities way out of whack.
- ryacko 7y ago
  Maybe your comment is based on thinking about a recent conversation instead of replying to my comment. You make a few good points, but keep in mind that software development is both a centralization and planning problem. And exercising planning requires having accurate feedbacks.

by ryacko 7y ago

moron4hire 7y ago

I agree on your comment about "most efficient language". And I agree that the business-interest is micro-focused on monthly-cost versus yearly- or even multi-yearly-cost. I think those two things are at odds with each other. I think a lot of technical decisions are being made on a short-sighted business level. And I think a lot of people on the technology side have inculcated too much of the business message. I'm not arguing against ever using languages like Python or Ruby or PHP or whatever. But I think a lot of people make assumptions that their language choice doesn't matter. In a lot of the same ways that building an entire economy on carbon fuels was "easy", it only worked because of externalities. As a profession, we need to be taking a longer view of our craft. I don't think that it is true that it's impossible to make C++ secure. I don't think that it's true that--say--Java and C# are less productive than--say--Python or Ruby. On a surface level, certain things are easier, but once you start digging into real problems, there isn't much difference. And experienced developers in any language will be far beyond that surface syntax. I just think that, as a profession, we have our priorities way out of whack.

ryacko 7y ago
Maybe your comment is based on thinking about a recent conversation instead of replying to my comment. You make a few good points, but keep in mind that software development is both a centralization and planning problem. And exercising planning requires having accurate feedbacks.