4 ms·

It's irrelevant whether it is in principle possible to create faster tools in other languages. Joe Schmo, who ran into a wall with his project in Node.js, is ly

It's irrelevant whether it is in principle possible to create faster tools in other languages. Joe Schmo, who ran into a wall with his project in Node.js, is lying to himself if he thinks that rewriting the whole thing in Rust is going to magically solve the problems that drove his project into a wall in the first place. A bad workman blames his tools.

pdimitar 5y ago
It's irrelevant according to you. That's not an accepted fact.
- optymizer 5y ago
  I find your comment puzzling. What specifically is not an accepted fact?
  - pdimitar 5y ago
    Sorry, should have been more specific, my bad. I mean this part in particular: > It's irrelevant whether it is in principle possible to create faster tools in other languages. I disagree that it's irrelevant. There's a ton of development tooling nowadays that can be much faster. The accumulated slowdown and thumb-twiddling that ensues when 20 JS junior devs have to wait for a solid minute or two on their mid-range laptops can and has lead to real productivity losses.
    - optymizer 5y ago
      In this scenario, the team uses dev tool X for project Y. I'm not arguing that X shouldn't be faster, or even that it's not beneficial for Y to run faster. My original point was that the team that worked on project Y so far is unlikely to do a better job in a completely new language, just because some other team managed to write fast software in that language, because the other team isn't the one working on project Y. I didn't think this would be a controversial point. I probably should have phrased it better.
      - pdimitar 5y ago
        Now that you explained it I actually agree with you so maybe another phrasing was needed indeed. But maybe I'm just dumb and didn't get it earlier. :) I agree the odds are against the team employing a new language. Far from impossible though. I've seen it successfully pulled off a number of times (I've seen plenty of unsuccessful tries as well).

pdimitar 5y ago

It's irrelevant according to you. That's not an accepted fact.

optymizer 5y ago
I find your comment puzzling. What specifically is not an accepted fact?
- pdimitar 5y ago
  Sorry, should have been more specific, my bad. I mean this part in particular: > It's irrelevant whether it is in principle possible to create faster tools in other languages. I disagree that it's irrelevant. There's a ton of development tooling nowadays that can be much faster. The accumulated slowdown and thumb-twiddling that ensues when 20 JS junior devs have to wait for a solid minute or two on their mid-range laptops can and has lead to real productivity losses.
  - optymizer 5y ago
    In this scenario, the team uses dev tool X for project Y. I'm not arguing that X shouldn't be faster, or even that it's not beneficial for Y to run faster. My original point was that the team that worked on project Y so far is unlikely to do a better job in a completely new language, just because some other team managed to write fast software in that language, because the other team isn't the one working on project Y. I didn't think this would be a controversial point. I probably should have phrased it better.
    - pdimitar 5y ago
      Now that you explained it I actually agree with you so maybe another phrasing was needed indeed. But maybe I'm just dumb and didn't get it earlier. :) I agree the odds are against the team employing a new language. Far from impossible though. I've seen it successfully pulled off a number of times (I've seen plenty of unsuccessful tries as well).