4 ms·
I don't understand Rich Hickey's point. How does his thought experiment address Steve Yegge's points? Would someone care to explain?
by gregschlom 16y ago
I don't understand Rich Hickey's point. How does his thought experiment address Steve Yegge's points?
Would someone care to explain?
- Roboprog 16y agoReduction to absurdity: if (almost) everybody got to add something, you would have an undifferentiated mass of scar tissue. There needs to be some discrimination of what changes "fit" the language. Of course, "fit" and beauty are in the eye of the beholder :-(
- ntoshev 16y agoIt doesn't quite work, because Steve says "you need to be more open to fixing annoyances" and Rich responds "Look what a mess would it be if we fixed everyone's annoyance!". There is a big continuum between the place Clojure is now and the hypothetical absurd described by Rich.
- Goladus 16y agoOnly one point is addressed, and that is the broad idea that "languages must say yes" (to be popular). None of the details or more subtle points are addressed.