16 ms·

Maybe it's me who missed the point - but I think the author isn't saying "hard things aren't worth it" (as all of the comments here seem to suggest), but he's s

Maybe it's me who missed the point - but I think the author isn't saying "hard things aren't worth it" (as all of the comments here seem to suggest), but he's saying that truly mastering the warts of a technology that is full of warts is a waste of time. I think the faulty logic there is that _every_ technology over a certain age is going to seem full of warts... so the alternative it keep moving on to trying to master the latest and greatest buzzwords.

enneff 15y ago
Yes, that is what I meant. Thanks for re-stating it so clearly. To your point, I have two reactions. The first is that I feel you are being pessimistic. To some appearances software seems to be getting worse, but if you step back we actually have some pretty amazing tools these days. I personally find Go a better language than any other I've used. (disclosure: I'm part of the Go team.) My second reaction is: sure, of course we should move on to new things. We don't drive the same cars we did 40 years ago, yet software moves way faster than the auto industry and we're still using C for a lot of stuff. Programmers should be more adept at re-skilling for new languages and tools. The best ones already are.