3 ms·

It's the same old problem of identity beliefs: An "attack" on any part of the belief is an attack upon the person, and elicits an "I must defeat my opponent by

It's the same old problem of identity beliefs: An "attack" on any part of the belief is an attack upon the person, and elicits an "I must defeat my opponent by any means necessary (fair or unfair)" response. Discussions will take hard turns into logical fallacies and the person making them will be convinced that they're acting perfectly normal, because the lower brain has cut off the rational section as part of the "fight-or-flight" response. It's fascinating to watch the Jekyll-Hyde transformation in real time, but not fun trying to disengage. We take on identity beliefs in so many areas of our lives (most commonly in religion and politics), and programming languages or text editor preferences are particularly notable areas of identity belief when it comes to programmers. I've long given up participating in language or editor criticism because it's simply impossible to have a rational discussion about it. We used to have similar problems with RISC vs CISC discussions, but I think that has largely faded into history by now.

MaxBarraclough 5y ago
Right. The article boils down to people being personally attached to programming languages, leading to emotion-driven fanboyism rather than serious objective evaluation of languages/paradigms/ideas. It's unfortunate that software developer culture treats this as normal, rather than as unbecoming and, frankly, immature.
- pjmlp 5y ago
  That is bound to happen when certain groups sell themselves as X Developer instead of Software Developer. So anything that diminshes the value of X is seen as an attack of the valuation of the respective person skills.
- klibertp 5y ago
  > rather than as unbecoming and, frankly, immature. It's natural and normal for young people, I think. It's easy to be entranced by some idea when you're in your teens and early twenties. Older programmers, if they stay active and not transition to management, early retirement, or get burned out and switch careers completely, tend not to be that dogmatic about the tools they use. I wonder what is the percentage of programmers below 30 years old in all active programmers? On the other hand, getting dogmatic, cult-like even, is sometimes the only reasonable strategy for a language to survive. Languages that offer capabilities way beyond mainstream (which is not that hard...) often have a small, but very dedicated following. The people there have to believe their language is so much better than the others, because otherwise they'd have to admit that the amount of time and effort they pour into it is unreasonable. Such communities are allergic to posts saying that "another language also has this" or "you can do the same in language/tool X", and they demand a level of dedication which, for outsiders, is just creepy. But, without that, the whole project, the language and ecosystem, would simply die, and more often than not that would be a real loss for the programming world. It's hard to interact with such groups as a non-believer, but without them some of the great ideas of the past wouldn't be preserved, and some great new ideas wouldn't be implemented. So, I think in some cases the fanboyism is a rational stance to take. In most cases, though, it's just immature expression of fascination, and then it indeed serves no real purpose, other than annoying more experienced devs.
  - joelbluminator 5y ago
    Oh boy, your view of what happens to old developers (either early retirement, burn out or career switch) is quite depressing.

MaxBarraclough 5y ago

Right. The article boils down to people being personally attached to programming languages, leading to emotion-driven fanboyism rather than serious objective evaluation of languages/paradigms/ideas. It's unfortunate that software developer culture treats this as normal, rather than as unbecoming and, frankly, immature.

pjmlp 5y ago
That is bound to happen when certain groups sell themselves as X Developer instead of Software Developer. So anything that diminshes the value of X is seen as an attack of the valuation of the respective person skills.
klibertp 5y ago
> rather than as unbecoming and, frankly, immature. It's natural and normal for young people, I think. It's easy to be entranced by some idea when you're in your teens and early twenties. Older programmers, if they stay active and not transition to management, early retirement, or get burned out and switch careers completely, tend not to be that dogmatic about the tools they use. I wonder what is the percentage of programmers below 30 years old in all active programmers? On the other hand, getting dogmatic, cult-like even, is sometimes the only reasonable strategy for a language to survive. Languages that offer capabilities way beyond mainstream (which is not that hard...) often have a small, but very dedicated following. The people there have to believe their language is so much better than the others, because otherwise they'd have to admit that the amount of time and effort they pour into it is unreasonable. Such communities are allergic to posts saying that "another language also has this" or "you can do the same in language/tool X", and they demand a level of dedication which, for outsiders, is just creepy. But, without that, the whole project, the language and ecosystem, would simply die, and more often than not that would be a real loss for the programming world. It's hard to interact with such groups as a non-believer, but without them some of the great ideas of the past wouldn't be preserved, and some great new ideas wouldn't be implemented. So, I think in some cases the fanboyism is a rational stance to take. In most cases, though, it's just immature expression of fascination, and then it indeed serves no real purpose, other than annoying more experienced devs.
- joelbluminator 5y ago
  Oh boy, your view of what happens to old developers (either early retirement, burn out or career switch) is quite depressing.