3 ms·

This is a very arrogant and dismissive attitude to take. Consider that both pg and DHH prefer dynamic typing. Maybe you can think less of them as devs, but what

This is a very arrogant and dismissive attitude to take. Consider that both pg and DHH prefer dynamic typing. Maybe you can think less of them as devs, but what each built is undeniable. What have you built or added to the field that justifies such a lack of tolerance of those who don’t subscribe to your point of view?

insanitybit 3y ago
I reject the idea that pg/DHH should be treated with any authority here, and I reject the idea that I need to prove my authority to you. That said, yes, of course my post is arrogant and dismissive. I am outright saying I won't engage in a conversation. I'm comfortable with that.
- LaGrange 3y ago
  > I am outright saying I won't engage in a conversation. It's actually arrogant and dismissive because you say that in a way clearly intended to spark a conversation. Also, pretty much all arguments for explicit typing suffer from mechanistic bias (see, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmJsCaQTXiE&t=143s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmJsCaQTXiE&t=143s). I'm comfortable saying I just enjoy tinkering with a formal description of a data structure, because I'm a type enjoyer, not a type fan.
  - insanitybit 3y ago
    > It's actually arrogant and dismissive because you say that in a way clearly intended to spark a conversation. I don't follow at all. Why would it be arrogant or dismissive to say something in an attempt to discuss it? I commented in good faith to an article that has a strong opinion ("willing to die on this hill") with a reflection of my own strong opinion ("unwilling to discuss"). At most you could say it was inflammatory, which wasn't intentional although looking at the insane number of child comments it apparently ways.