3 ms·
That is dumb and counterproductive. Your entire scenario presupposes unlimited labor capacity and funding (monetary or otherwise), so “diversity is better!” In
by newZWhoDis 3y ago
That is dumb and counterproductive. Your entire scenario presupposes unlimited labor capacity and funding (monetary or otherwise), so “diversity is better!”
In reality, the people wasting their time to produce a redundant ground-up rewrite of existing functionally could have spent their time and effort on something else that actually moves the world forward.
- moregrist 3y agoI think the only thing I’m assuming here is that there are people who want to do the work. Perhaps because it’s fun to write a compiler (it is!), or because they don’t view llvm as the pinnacle of compiler technology, or maybe their employer sees value in it. And apparently there are people who want to do the work, because we have work on a couple of implementations. You can choose to use your one true implementation, no one is stopping you. But it’s kind of weird to assume that people working on another one are detracting from yours. That’s not usually the way open source software works.