3 ms·

This is a very large comment, filled with legitimate observations about how Rust (and most other programming language communities) choose to defend their name,

This is a very large comment, filled with legitimate observations about how Rust (and most other programming language communities) choose to defend their name, logo, etc. It has absolutely nothing to do with how "proprietary" is used in the open source community. To make it as simple as possible: if your use of the word "proprietary" includes Python and Rust but excludes Borland C, you've failed to use to word in a way that is substantive and useful to everyone else in this community. The implied risk of Rust's trademark terms is entirely ahistorical: C did not win as a systems programming language because it satisfied FRAND or any other standard for openness. It won because Worse Is Better, in spite of onerous licensing restrictions by companies with extremely expensive and proprietary C compilers.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
shrimp_emoji 4y ago
>It won because Worse Is Better I don't think this is why. I think it "won" because it was the best "high-level" language of the time and exploded to fill a huge niche, historically. In other words, historical luck. I think that's also how JavaScript won. Since it's always luck, and since the luckiest thing is rarely the "best" thing, it just looks like it's a selection for ironically worse quality from the outside.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  "Worse is Better" isn't meant to be derogatory: it's the term of art used by the Unix world to describe Unix and C's own adoption arc[1]. [1]: https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-11/WorseIsBetter/index43bb.html?title=Main_Page&oldid=86 https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]