3 ms·

Herd mentality? It's the only explanation that fits the facts... If you're pursuing a programming language/environment because it's fashionable, you're doing i

Herd mentality? It's the only explanation that fits the facts... If you're pursuing a programming language/environment because it's fashionable, you're doing it wrong.

batista 15y ago
>Herd mentality? It's the only explanation that fits the facts... Yes, if we ignore all the other explanations, like, say, network effects. You don't get to chose a programming language for it's merits as a language alone. Tools, implementations, contributors, availability of programmers to hire, available documentation, available projects and libs to build upon, rate of innovations (depended on people working on compilers for the language), core library, etc are far more important. >If you're pursuing a programming language/environment because it's fashionable, you're doing it wrong. And if you're pursuing a programming language/environment because the language is the best (in itself), you're also doing it wrong. You have to take the whole ecosystem and community in mind.
- fractallyte 15y ago
  I think a superrational individual (in Douglas Hofstadter's sense: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superrationality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superrationality) would choose the best programming language (for the task), not the fashionable one; and would expect others to do similarly. Unfortunately - where are those others...? The niche popularity of Smalltalk (and other key languages) reveals more about the mentality of people comprising the computing ecosystem than it does the languages.
  - batista 15y ago
    >The niche popularity of Smalltalk (and other key languages) reveals more about the mentality of people comprising the computing ecosystem than it does the languages. I disagree. If it reveals anything is that the language itself is small part of the equation. People avoid Smalltalk for historical reasons, not because of their mentality. What historical reasons? 1) Smalltalk was slow at the time it had to catch on, and cpus/memories weren't up to par. C++ gave far better results with the same equipment. 2) Smalltalk vendors charged an arm and a leg. 3) Smalltalk image environment wasn't easily integrated with other workflows. 4) Smalltalk vendors were in competition for the market, instead of trying to grow it and have a smaller slice of a much larger pie. 5) The UIs were horrible.

Herd mentality? It's the only explanation that fits the facts... If you're pursuing a programming language/environment because it's fashionable, you're doing it wrong.

batista 15y ago

>Herd mentality? It's the only explanation that fits the facts... Yes, if we ignore all the other explanations, like, say, network effects. You don't get to chose a programming language for it's merits as a language alone. Tools, implementations, contributors, availability of programmers to hire, available documentation, available projects and libs to build upon, rate of innovations (depended on people working on compilers for the language), core library, etc are far more important. >If you're pursuing a programming language/environment because it's fashionable, you're doing it wrong. And if you're pursuing a programming language/environment because the language is the best (in itself), you're also doing it wrong. You have to take the whole ecosystem and community in mind.

fractallyte 15y ago
I think a superrational individual (in Douglas Hofstadter's sense: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superrationality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superrationality) would choose the best programming language (for the task), not the fashionable one; and would expect others to do similarly. Unfortunately - where are those others...? The niche popularity of Smalltalk (and other key languages) reveals more about the mentality of people comprising the computing ecosystem than it does the languages.
- batista 15y ago
  >The niche popularity of Smalltalk (and other key languages) reveals more about the mentality of people comprising the computing ecosystem than it does the languages. I disagree. If it reveals anything is that the language itself is small part of the equation. People avoid Smalltalk for historical reasons, not because of their mentality. What historical reasons? 1) Smalltalk was slow at the time it had to catch on, and cpus/memories weren't up to par. C++ gave far better results with the same equipment. 2) Smalltalk vendors charged an arm and a leg. 3) Smalltalk image environment wasn't easily integrated with other workflows. 4) Smalltalk vendors were in competition for the market, instead of trying to grow it and have a smaller slice of a much larger pie. 5) The UIs were horrible.