4 ms·
IMHO, one should make one's language choices based on utility and NOT solely on metacharacteristics such as quality of governance, DEI efforts, or nation of ori
by daviddever23box 3y ago
IMHO, one should make one's language choices based on utility and NOT solely on metacharacteristics such as quality of governance, DEI efforts, or nation of origin. None of these things matter when the program is run, if the process and end result do not solve the problem(s) at hand.
Thorough feature discussion, appropriate licensing, and accessibility of source code for risk evaluation are metacharacteristics that are relevant.
And-lest anyone think that, as a white cisgender male born in America, I have no skin in the game, it is my belief that any interactions with others ought to be principled on transparent rigor and mutual respect, from which all other things should flow.
- jareds 3y agoI was not aware that there are any recent issues with the Rust community since I don't use Rust. while technical characteristics of a language are important the ability of a community to continue supporting the language for the long term is also important. Go has Google backing it, Java has Oracle backing it, etc. Is there enough corporate use of Rust that if the current Rust community falls apart someone will create a stable version of the language and toolchain that will be maintained and updated?
- throwaway2037 3y agoI was not aware that there are any recent issues with the Rust community Maybe this? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36101501 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36101501 -> "Why I Left Rust" -> https://www.jntrnr.com/why-i-left-rust/ https://www.jntrnr.com/why-i-left-rust/ And this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36105637 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36105637 And this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36106942 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36106942
- version_five 3y agosolely I agree with that, but that stuff you mention is still a factor. Politics is creeping into everything, and there are lots of reasons why choosing a relatively politically stable language is important, though obviously not the only factor. I think the best one could hope for is a lot of diverse groups with different political views and motivations being invested in the future of a language, so that despite any culture war stuff, there's likely to be a useful version that survives.
- daviddever23box 3y agoMicrosoft and Alphabet have plenty of motivation to keep things on track, as does the Linux Foundation and others. I suspect that, if things get completely out of hand, that corporate sponsors might impress their will upon the Rust Foundation to address any issues around governance. Politics will creep into anything, if one allows that to happen.
- Mountain_Skies 3y agoGoogle and Microsoft are political entities with their own political agendas that sometimes aren't aligned with profit making. Many of the activists in CoC dominated communities don't care the slightest bit about profit or even continued existence of their entity if it means they can enforce their brand of ideological purity. FAANG entities threatening to reduce or eliminate resource allocation to a project will for some be evidence of the capitalistic desire to control everything and will motivate the community to welcome the purge of the unclean from their community.
- justinclift 3y agoHeh Heh Heh New potential language feature: "Not created nor maintained by Americans". ;) (/s) Though that in itself potentially opens up other cans of worms, some of which could also be not good.