3 ms·
the fact that there are repeated statements like "why X" where X = some language, points to rationalization more than reality; if the language is really so good
by iloveCS 3y ago
the fact that there are repeated statements like "why X" where X = some language, points to rationalization more than reality; if the language is really so good, there won't be any need for a "why" articles on it. I haven't seen a repeated series of "Why C#" or "Why Go" or "Why Swift" articles. I also think Lisp is way overrated. Swift is based on Miranda which is based on Hope which borrows heavily from SML...There's nothing Swift can't do better that Lisp can.
- mepian 3y agoPretty sure Microsoft's marketing department actively pushed C# at least, there was no need for grassroots advocacy in this case.
- pluijzer 3y agoI do not agree. I do not have time to familiarize myself with every language in existence to such a level that their strengths become obvious to me. It is perfectly reasonable for a expert in a language to write an article on why to use it.
- JonChesterfield 3y agoDifferent languages are better and worse at different things. It's a really complicated design space. There probably are some which are better than others on every axis, but generally making one better at some things makes it worse at others.
- jabradoodle 3y agoI have seen those articles, also note, each of those languages is the product of and has the backing of giant corporations.
- ravi-delia 3y agoThere was a straight decade where HN was covered, nay choked, by "Why Go" articles. This ended under two years ago. Swift doesn't get the same coverage, but pretty clearly falls into roughly the same category for everyone but Apple UI developers
- pjmlp 3y ago> I haven't seen a repeated series of "Why C#" or "Why Go" or "Why Swift" articles. Then you aren't long enough on HN.
- Capricorn2481 3y agoSwift is so far a descendant from SML, it seems silly to compare Lisp and Swift.