3 ms·
What is this constant push in software development to dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator? I don't see it in other fields, at all.
by booleandilemma 2y ago
What is this constant push in software development to dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator?
I don't see it in other fields, at all.
- codr7 2y agoI have to say I have no trouble seeing it absolutely everywhere.
- worik 2y ago> dumb everything down to the lowest common denominator What do you mean?
- the_gastropod 2y agoOff the bat: I like Rust. I'm still very much a novice with it, but I enjoy it. But almost the entirety of Computer Science is based on abstractions because they're helpful to "dumb down" some details that aren't super-important for our day-to-day work. E.g., writing TCP protocols directly is Assembly would be too fine-grained detail for most people's usual work, and using some existing abstraction is "good enough" virtually all of the time (even though we might be able to optimize things for our use-cases if we did drop down to that level) There exists programming work where fiddling with lifetimes is just too fiddly to be worthwhile (e.g., web development, probably is more than fine using a good ol' garbage collected language). This isn't about "dumbing down" anything, it's about refocusing on what's important for the job you're doing.
- johnisgood 2y agoI am against dumbing things down, too (although I do not see its relevance to my comment), but for example I have no issues with OCaml, C, Factor, Ada, Common Lisp, etc. It is just a personal preference anyways.