4 ms·

Many typed languages are like that, but the big difference is that they admit the trade-off. In Ruby on Rails, dissent is a big taboo, so they blame the problem

Many typed languages are like that, but the big difference is that they admit the trade-off. In Ruby on Rails, dissent is a big taboo, so they blame the problems on the devs (the unwashed nameless masses) rather than tackle the problem itself. That's why you have all these different tools and concepts; since they try to sandpaper over all the magical complexity by adding more complexity, it becomes a no-true Scotsman trivia game. What trips me up tbh is how tech history repeats itself almost verbatim. The Smalltalk story is very similar but with a different cast.

rileyphone 3y ago
In what way is Smalltalk similar? Its main problem was that it stopped evolving.
- namaria 3y ago
  All software suffers from this. The whole point of programmable computers is allowing systems of unbounded complexity. Every tooling discussion degenerates into "it's a foot gun" vs "you're holding it wrong". If you remove friction, people will build bigger foot guns. If you install too many guardrails, holding it right requires contortion. The point is not which set of tools you use. There is no substitute for understanding the problem domain, the tools at hand and the labor market you have access to. Everything has a cost, you can't get free advantages from some technical insight or another.