4 ms·

Golang has lots of good examples of design discussions without vitriol in their RFCs and proposals. There is the occasional bikeshedding and needless bickering

Golang has lots of good examples of design discussions without vitriol in their RFCs and proposals. There is the occasional bikeshedding and needless bickering granted, but it mostly stays civil and is the most mature language community I've ever had the pleasure of being a part of.

Gwypaas 3y ago
Benevolent dictators make things way easier.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
euiq 3y ago
Clearly the solution is to clone Russ Cox.
- Agingcoder 3y ago
  That made me laugh thanks.
biomcgary 3y ago
I think there might be a connection between Go's pragmatism and the culture fostered around it and Rust's correctness and its culture. On the other hand, it could be that Google owning Go makes the bigger difference. I know that Ian Lance Taylor created several versions of generics that got shot down, which must have been frustrating. However, I don't remember hearing the slightest bit of internal conflict from the core team. (I pick on generics because it was the largest and longest "conflict" in Go's history.) The primary language developers/owners work at the same company, so presumably they have more bandwidth (behind closed doors) and more financial incentive to provide a united front. Or, they're just a pragmatic group of engineers with drama turned to -11.
- HideousKojima 3y ago
  Similarly, in the C#/.NET community, most of the drama fits one of the following two archetypes: 1) MS taking control of something the community doesn't want them taking control of 2) Important open source third party library switching to a proprietary license Rarely do you see drama centered around specific individuals like you see in the Rust or JavaScript communities. So I think that lends some further credence to your theory that the design goals of the language help foster specific cultures around them.
- yencabulator 3y ago
  > I know that Ian Lance Taylor created several versions of generics that got shot down, which must have been frustrating. I always felt like he wrote down those non-final designs more as an effort to discover & document why exactly each one wasn't good enough, so they might guide the future design(s). I think he was well aware of the various flaws and unwanted trade-offs, and wanted them to serve as a guide to the conversation.
josephg 3y ago
Almost all of the work the rust project does is like this too. The RFC process is pretty consistently lovely. People just go back and forth talking about different design approaches with respect and thoughtfulness. I wish decisions happened faster, but decisions certainly get made and everyone is listened to. These conversations just don’t make the front page of HN.
pie_flavor 3y ago
So does Rust. And Golang also has good examples of bad design discussions with vitriol, such as the one about metrics collection. This is a silly comparison.
phlakaton 3y ago
The drama around Go modules comes immediately to mind as a counterexample – and that one was a technical snafu that impacted many projects using Go. Pobody’s nerfect.

Gwypaas 3y ago

Benevolent dictators make things way easier.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

euiq 3y ago

Clearly the solution is to clone Russ Cox.

Agingcoder 3y ago
That made me laugh thanks.

biomcgary 3y ago

I think there might be a connection between Go's pragmatism and the culture fostered around it and Rust's correctness and its culture. On the other hand, it could be that Google owning Go makes the bigger difference. I know that Ian Lance Taylor created several versions of generics that got shot down, which must have been frustrating. However, I don't remember hearing the slightest bit of internal conflict from the core team. (I pick on generics because it was the largest and longest "conflict" in Go's history.) The primary language developers/owners work at the same company, so presumably they have more bandwidth (behind closed doors) and more financial incentive to provide a united front. Or, they're just a pragmatic group of engineers with drama turned to -11.

HideousKojima 3y ago
Similarly, in the C#/.NET community, most of the drama fits one of the following two archetypes: 1) MS taking control of something the community doesn't want them taking control of 2) Important open source third party library switching to a proprietary license Rarely do you see drama centered around specific individuals like you see in the Rust or JavaScript communities. So I think that lends some further credence to your theory that the design goals of the language help foster specific cultures around them.
yencabulator 3y ago
> I know that Ian Lance Taylor created several versions of generics that got shot down, which must have been frustrating. I always felt like he wrote down those non-final designs more as an effort to discover & document why exactly each one wasn't good enough, so they might guide the future design(s). I think he was well aware of the various flaws and unwanted trade-offs, and wanted them to serve as a guide to the conversation.

josephg 3y ago

Almost all of the work the rust project does is like this too. The RFC process is pretty consistently lovely. People just go back and forth talking about different design approaches with respect and thoughtfulness. I wish decisions happened faster, but decisions certainly get made and everyone is listened to. These conversations just don’t make the front page of HN.

pie_flavor 3y ago

So does Rust. And Golang also has good examples of bad design discussions with vitriol, such as the one about metrics collection. This is a silly comparison.

phlakaton 3y ago

The drama around Go modules comes immediately to mind as a counterexample – and that one was a technical snafu that impacted many projects using Go. Pobody’s nerfect.