3 ms·

Language matters. The same jargon that is praised in 4chan/twitter etc... doesn't translate too well to HN. This could have been an important comment, but the

Language matters. The same jargon that is praised in 4chan/twitter etc... doesn't translate too well to HN. This could have been an important comment, but the acid and hostile terms just got in the way of the message. But well... I have to cope and seethe I guess?

vasco 2y ago
I respect it, sometimes you feel strongly about something and you let it out. It's fine to brace some downvotes sometimes.
- gchamonlive 2y ago
  I respect the right to free speech, but I have no obligation to respect hostility. This can vanish from hackernews for all I care and I wouldn't miss it. And if you really feel strongly about something, getting your comment flagged and killed is a curious way to go about expressing it.
  - Phiwise_ 2y ago
    Amusing that someone disagrees with you on appraisal and your first reaction is to accuse of a call for rulebreaking. There's no vote going on here. Whatever it was is flagged now. If you want to restate your opinion at least add to the conversation.
    - znpy 2y ago
      Interestingly enough, my comment was flagged with just -1 of score point. This kind of rhetoric effectively shuts down discussion as long as it does not adhere to some pre-approved narrative. What is said is: > Shortsighted discussion. > C’s integers being wobbly-sized is the reason we have C compilers for pretty much every conceivable cpu architecture and we only have rust/swift/other compilers for a handful of carefully picked architecture. I'll leave out the "controversial" (?) part (suggesting some ways to deal with other points of view, no racial slurs nor cussing involved). Anyway: there are entire industries where C-as-a-protocol is fine enough (and actually appreciated, even though the author doesn't like it). And then again... Some other people commented that "in 2024, only a handful of CPU architectures really matter anymore." which is even more shortsighted. There are entire industries that do not use X86 or ARM, let alone RISC-V. There are many use-cases for MIPS, weird/other architectures (PowerPC, 8051, m68k-derivatives, pic-micro)... I had a relative that used to work on control software for space stuff, the CPUs used there are even older and definitely not x86/x86-64, arm or risc-v). So yeah, complaining that the C language does not fit your own very specific use case is shortsighted (and frankly, I'm putting this very politely). We should all remember that the world does not revolve around us and around our own use case.
      - gchamonlive 2y ago
        > This kind of rhetoric effectively shuts down discussion as long as it does not adhere to some pre-approved narrative. Dude, you are not the victim here. My point was to show you that there are different modes of discourse for each medium you use to communicate. You don't refer to your grandma the same way you talk to your friends. I would suggest you repost that part with the core of your argument again because this comment section is under a dead comment.
card_zero 2y ago
The article started it. The title's premise rapidly changes into "We must all speak C, and therefore C is not just a programming language anymore" (my italics), and is then abandoned, and the rest is complaining about ABIs. And it's full of memes. But the last few sentences try to reach back to the premise: > But it’s not, it’s a protocol. A bad protocol certainly, but the protocol we have to use nonetheless! > Sorry C, you conquered the world, maybe you don’t get to have nice things anymore. > You don’t see England trying to improve itself, do you? So, the complaint is that C is popular. Fair enough, I too reflexively hate popular things, but this bad habit hasn't turned me against C, yet. And then "maybe you don't get to have nice things any more" is a distorted Simpsons quote, and what's being implied here? That whatever is the lingua franca for interfaces should be taken away by ... the ABI police ... and replaced by an endless series of alternatives, each of which is itself also soon removed for having become too gnarly? I don't understand the closing sentence at all. England? What? Something to do with the English language presumably. I am fond of that kludgy language, too. Should we all get aboard a bandwagon to replace it with a highly rational conlang?
znpy 2y ago
> Language matters. Do you realize the article is full of "fuck" repeated over and over?
znpy 2y ago
> Language matters. Do you realize the article is full of "fuck" repeated over and over? > This could have been an important comment, but the acid and hostile terms just got in the way of the message. Is it so big of an issue, getting an "important" (to use your words) point ignoring the irrelevant parts? > But well... I have to cope and seethe I guess? The comment was really directed at the author of the article (not even whoever posted it) not sure why you're taking that as if it was directed to you, and on a personal level.
- gchamonlive 2y ago
  > Do you realize the article is full of "fuck" repeated over and over? So what? Does it make it ok to pollute the comment section, which is separate from the article, with hostile comments? Let's get an overblown example: does it make it ok to be racist and antisemitic if you are in a group discussing Mein Kampf? I don't think so. > Is it so big of an issue, getting an "important" (to use your words) point ignoring the irrelevant parts? It would be if the irrelevant part don't poison the rest of the discourse. I guess there are many intelligent racists out there. We don't need them and I don't care what they have to say. > The comment was really directed at the author of the article (not even whoever posted it) not sure why you're taking that as if it was directed to you, and on a personal level. I am not. That last part is using a figure of speech called sarcasm. Could I have written my comment without it? Sure, but it was designed to redirect the kind of hostility towards the OP so that it becomes clear that it's not acceptable.
  - znpy 2y ago
    > So what? Does it make it ok to pollute the comment section, which is separate from the article, with hostile comments? Irrelevant. Imagine applying the same logic: the whole article is dismissed becuse of the word "fuck" being sprinkled around because "language matters". > Let's get an overblown example: does it make it ok to be racist and antisemitic if you are in a group discussing Mein Kampf? I don't think so. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum > It would be if the irrelevant part don't poison the rest of the discourse. I guess there are many intelligent racists out there. We don't need them and I don't care what they have to say. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." What can I say, this tells a lot about you. Discussing with people you strongly disagree with is a necessary and unavoidable step to change other people's mind. If you're not willing to go closer to people you disagree with and try and educate about a more open point of view (a not racist point of view, to go along with your example) then you'll never make any change in the world: it really means you're okay with racism as it is. At this point i'm really done arguing with you (I did my part). Farewell, best of luck.

vasco 2y ago

I respect it, sometimes you feel strongly about something and you let it out. It's fine to brace some downvotes sometimes.

gchamonlive 2y ago
I respect the right to free speech, but I have no obligation to respect hostility. This can vanish from hackernews for all I care and I wouldn't miss it. And if you really feel strongly about something, getting your comment flagged and killed is a curious way to go about expressing it.
- Phiwise_ 2y ago
  Amusing that someone disagrees with you on appraisal and your first reaction is to accuse of a call for rulebreaking. There's no vote going on here. Whatever it was is flagged now. If you want to restate your opinion at least add to the conversation.
  - znpy 2y ago
    Interestingly enough, my comment was flagged with just -1 of score point. This kind of rhetoric effectively shuts down discussion as long as it does not adhere to some pre-approved narrative. What is said is: > Shortsighted discussion. > C’s integers being wobbly-sized is the reason we have C compilers for pretty much every conceivable cpu architecture and we only have rust/swift/other compilers for a handful of carefully picked architecture. I'll leave out the "controversial" (?) part (suggesting some ways to deal with other points of view, no racial slurs nor cussing involved). Anyway: there are entire industries where C-as-a-protocol is fine enough (and actually appreciated, even though the author doesn't like it). And then again... Some other people commented that "in 2024, only a handful of CPU architectures really matter anymore." which is even more shortsighted. There are entire industries that do not use X86 or ARM, let alone RISC-V. There are many use-cases for MIPS, weird/other architectures (PowerPC, 8051, m68k-derivatives, pic-micro)... I had a relative that used to work on control software for space stuff, the CPUs used there are even older and definitely not x86/x86-64, arm or risc-v). So yeah, complaining that the C language does not fit your own very specific use case is shortsighted (and frankly, I'm putting this very politely). We should all remember that the world does not revolve around us and around our own use case.
    - gchamonlive 2y ago
      > This kind of rhetoric effectively shuts down discussion as long as it does not adhere to some pre-approved narrative. Dude, you are not the victim here. My point was to show you that there are different modes of discourse for each medium you use to communicate. You don't refer to your grandma the same way you talk to your friends. I would suggest you repost that part with the core of your argument again because this comment section is under a dead comment.

card_zero 2y ago

The article started it. The title's premise rapidly changes into "We must all speak C, and therefore C is not just a programming language anymore" (my italics), and is then abandoned, and the rest is complaining about ABIs. And it's full of memes. But the last few sentences try to reach back to the premise: > But it’s not, it’s a protocol. A bad protocol certainly, but the protocol we have to use nonetheless! > Sorry C, you conquered the world, maybe you don’t get to have nice things anymore. > You don’t see England trying to improve itself, do you? So, the complaint is that C is popular. Fair enough, I too reflexively hate popular things, but this bad habit hasn't turned me against C, yet. And then "maybe you don't get to have nice things any more" is a distorted Simpsons quote, and what's being implied here? That whatever is the lingua franca for interfaces should be taken away by ... the ABI police ... and replaced by an endless series of alternatives, each of which is itself also soon removed for having become too gnarly? I don't understand the closing sentence at all. England? What? Something to do with the English language presumably. I am fond of that kludgy language, too. Should we all get aboard a bandwagon to replace it with a highly rational conlang?

znpy 2y ago

> Language matters. Do you realize the article is full of "fuck" repeated over and over?

znpy 2y ago

> Language matters. Do you realize the article is full of "fuck" repeated over and over? > This could have been an important comment, but the acid and hostile terms just got in the way of the message. Is it so big of an issue, getting an "important" (to use your words) point ignoring the irrelevant parts? > But well... I have to cope and seethe I guess? The comment was really directed at the author of the article (not even whoever posted it) not sure why you're taking that as if it was directed to you, and on a personal level.

gchamonlive 2y ago
> Do you realize the article is full of "fuck" repeated over and over? So what? Does it make it ok to pollute the comment section, which is separate from the article, with hostile comments? Let's get an overblown example: does it make it ok to be racist and antisemitic if you are in a group discussing Mein Kampf? I don't think so. > Is it so big of an issue, getting an "important" (to use your words) point ignoring the irrelevant parts? It would be if the irrelevant part don't poison the rest of the discourse. I guess there are many intelligent racists out there. We don't need them and I don't care what they have to say. > The comment was really directed at the author of the article (not even whoever posted it) not sure why you're taking that as if it was directed to you, and on a personal level. I am not. That last part is using a figure of speech called sarcasm. Could I have written my comment without it? Sure, but it was designed to redirect the kind of hostility towards the OP so that it becomes clear that it's not acceptable.
- znpy 2y ago
  > So what? Does it make it ok to pollute the comment section, which is separate from the article, with hostile comments? Irrelevant. Imagine applying the same logic: the whole article is dismissed becuse of the word "fuck" being sprinkled around because "language matters". > Let's get an overblown example: does it make it ok to be racist and antisemitic if you are in a group discussing Mein Kampf? I don't think so. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum > It would be if the irrelevant part don't poison the rest of the discourse. I guess there are many intelligent racists out there. We don't need them and I don't care what they have to say. "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." What can I say, this tells a lot about you. Discussing with people you strongly disagree with is a necessary and unavoidable step to change other people's mind. If you're not willing to go closer to people you disagree with and try and educate about a more open point of view (a not racist point of view, to go along with your example) then you'll never make any change in the world: it really means you're okay with racism as it is. At this point i'm really done arguing with you (I did my part). Farewell, best of luck.