3 ms·

Maybe part of the problem with what we see in software is caused by people not caring enough which programming language is used.

hnlmorg 6y ago
No. The article is right, too much time is wasted by programmers arguing which is the "right" programming language and we need to collectively learn to care less. For some, astroturfing about their favourite language is almost a religious experience. But the fact remains that even some of the "ugly" languages have valuable tools written in them and we're never going to rewrite the entire Linux / Windows / macOS / whatever stack in everyone's favourite language. And nor should we. It's a fools errand.
- commandlinefan 6y ago
  > valuable tools written in them That nobody can make changes to, or upgrade to take advantage of newer technology, or optimize for execution time or memory usage.
  - hnlmorg 6y ago
    > That nobody can make changes to, or upgrade to take advantage of newer technology, or optimize for execution time or memory usage. No. Not even close. Nothing is stopping anybody from contributing. More often people chose not to contribute because they don't want to contribute and then they use language as a retrospective excuse. But the fact that the tool exists in the first place dispels the myth that it couldn't exist due to some limitation of the language. As an open source contributor myself I've written code in a variety of languages, including some I don't personally like, and I do so happily when I know there's a bug that needed fixing or a feature I wanted included in a tool I like to use. That's how I know that people who care about a project will still contribute regardless of the language. Furthermore, arguing that language x doesn't "take advantage of newer technology" is ridiculous when it's bloody obvious to any developer worth their salt just how regularly popular languages are updated, runtimes optimised, etc. And arguing about tools not being optimised for execution time or memory usage misses the point that most tools aren't mission critical software running on embedded devices and most open source developers don't have hours of free time to hand roll assembly just to show off super cool benchmarks. In fact most tools can barely muster more than a couple of regular contributors, many of who work day jobs and have families to care to at the weekend. So instead of complaining that language x isn't optimised for performance, instead be fucking grateful that someone took time to write the tool and open source it in the first place. As an open source author myself I see time and time again just how entitled some users are and it's often ridiculous comments like the ones you've posted. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind if you don't want to contribute. But please don't insult my intelligence by saying my language choice is the inhibiting factor to the projects success when it's clearly already enough of a success for you to have stumbled upon it in the first place.
drivingmenuts 6y ago
Go is a hammer. Rust is a hammer. PHP is a hammer. JavaScript is a hammer. <your favorite language> is a hammer. The problem is finding the right nail. Everyone touting a language talks about how it will fix all the problems, rather than specifying what nail it’s best at working on. That’s the problem right there.
- jjgreen 6y ago
  PHP is a hammer, but what a hammer ... https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-php-singularity/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-php-singularity/

hnlmorg 6y ago

No. The article is right, too much time is wasted by programmers arguing which is the "right" programming language and we need to collectively learn to care less. For some, astroturfing about their favourite language is almost a religious experience. But the fact remains that even some of the "ugly" languages have valuable tools written in them and we're never going to rewrite the entire Linux / Windows / macOS / whatever stack in everyone's favourite language. And nor should we. It's a fools errand.

commandlinefan 6y ago
> valuable tools written in them That nobody can make changes to, or upgrade to take advantage of newer technology, or optimize for execution time or memory usage.
- hnlmorg 6y ago
  > That nobody can make changes to, or upgrade to take advantage of newer technology, or optimize for execution time or memory usage. No. Not even close. Nothing is stopping anybody from contributing. More often people chose not to contribute because they don't want to contribute and then they use language as a retrospective excuse. But the fact that the tool exists in the first place dispels the myth that it couldn't exist due to some limitation of the language. As an open source contributor myself I've written code in a variety of languages, including some I don't personally like, and I do so happily when I know there's a bug that needed fixing or a feature I wanted included in a tool I like to use. That's how I know that people who care about a project will still contribute regardless of the language. Furthermore, arguing that language x doesn't "take advantage of newer technology" is ridiculous when it's bloody obvious to any developer worth their salt just how regularly popular languages are updated, runtimes optimised, etc. And arguing about tools not being optimised for execution time or memory usage misses the point that most tools aren't mission critical software running on embedded devices and most open source developers don't have hours of free time to hand roll assembly just to show off super cool benchmarks. In fact most tools can barely muster more than a couple of regular contributors, many of who work day jobs and have families to care to at the weekend. So instead of complaining that language x isn't optimised for performance, instead be fucking grateful that someone took time to write the tool and open source it in the first place. As an open source author myself I see time and time again just how entitled some users are and it's often ridiculous comments like the ones you've posted. Don't get me wrong, I don't mind if you don't want to contribute. But please don't insult my intelligence by saying my language choice is the inhibiting factor to the projects success when it's clearly already enough of a success for you to have stumbled upon it in the first place.

drivingmenuts 6y ago

Go is a hammer. Rust is a hammer. PHP is a hammer. JavaScript is a hammer. <your favorite language> is a hammer. The problem is finding the right nail. Everyone touting a language talks about how it will fix all the problems, rather than specifying what nail it’s best at working on. That’s the problem right there.

jjgreen 6y ago
PHP is a hammer, but what a hammer ... https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-php-singularity/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-php-singularity/