4 ms·

> Not just here; someone with your nick also whined when the creator of C# made a technical deficient decision when choosing Go over C# to implement typescript.

> Not just here; someone with your nick also whined when the creator of C# made a technical deficient decision when choosing Go over C# to implement typescript. You know you could have just linked the reply instead? It states "C#, F# or Rust". But that wouldn't sound that nice, would it? I use and enjoy multiple programming languages and it helps me in day-to-day tasks greatly. It does not prevent me from seeing how .NET has flaws, but holistically it is way less bad than most other options on the market, including Erlang, Go, C or what have you. > It's hard for a rational person to believe that someone would make the argument that the creator of the language must have made a mistake just because he reached for (in his words) a more appropriate language in that context. So appeal to authority trumps observable consequences, technical limitations and arguments made about lackluster technical vision at microsoft? Interesting. No, I think it is the kind of people who refuse to engage with the subject on their own merits that are a problem, relegating to the powers that be all the argumentation. Even in a team environment, sure it is easier to say "a team/person X makes a choice Y" but you could also, if the situation warrants it, expand on why you think this way, and if you can't maybe you shouldn't be making a statement? So no, "TypeScript, including Anders Hejlsberg, choosing Go as the language to port TS compiler to" does not suddenly make pigs fly, if anything, but being seen as an endorsement from key C# figure is certainly a bad look.

lelanthran 1y ago
> So appeal to authority trumps observable consequences, technical limitations and arguments made about lackluster technical vision at microsoft? Your argument is that you have a better grasp of "technical limitations" than Anders Hejlsberg? You'll forgive the rest of us for not buying that; he has proven his chops, you haven't, especially as the argument (quite a thorough explanation of the context) from the typescript team is a lot more convincing than anything we've seen from you (a few nebulous phrases about technical superiority). > but being seen as an endorsement from key C# figure is certainly a bad look. Yeah, well, the team made their decision with no regard to optics. That lends more weight to their decision, not less.
- exceptione 1y ago
  The issue is not that Anders is incapable. His best argument was that they wanted to have the new code look like the old code. Many of the other arguments Anders brought forward were confusing, since some of them were technically incorrect. This raises some questions. Typescript is a huge success from Microsoft in terms of recapturing developers, without them knowing. MS is not a charity, look at how little love they give to F# compared to TS. * My personal guess is that the age old MS instinct came into play: be coûte que coûte backwards compatible, port all the bugs, do not disturb anything. * A second reason might be that TS people might not want to learn .net because of vibes. Do not underestimate vibes. Almost everyday on HN I see Python programs being posted where most often the creator would be better of if they had learned some next programming language. Decisions are seldomly made on a technical basis. We as humans decide emotionally, sometimes with rationalizations afterwards. And so, maybe Anders was rational in acknowledging the dev-social situation as is. Whatever the reason, this will not be without consequences. The team now has to invest in GO and now depends on Google to take TS forward. And yes, this is also typical MS, one department can easily undo the other. TLDR: the technical arguments were mostly nonsense, but the real arguments have likely more to do with age-old reflexes and dev-cultural issues.

lelanthran 1y ago

> So appeal to authority trumps observable consequences, technical limitations and arguments made about lackluster technical vision at microsoft? Your argument is that you have a better grasp of "technical limitations" than Anders Hejlsberg? You'll forgive the rest of us for not buying that; he has proven his chops, you haven't, especially as the argument (quite a thorough explanation of the context) from the typescript team is a lot more convincing than anything we've seen from you (a few nebulous phrases about technical superiority). > but being seen as an endorsement from key C# figure is certainly a bad look. Yeah, well, the team made their decision with no regard to optics. That lends more weight to their decision, not less.

exceptione 1y ago
The issue is not that Anders is incapable. His best argument was that they wanted to have the new code look like the old code. Many of the other arguments Anders brought forward were confusing, since some of them were technically incorrect. This raises some questions. Typescript is a huge success from Microsoft in terms of recapturing developers, without them knowing. MS is not a charity, look at how little love they give to F# compared to TS. * My personal guess is that the age old MS instinct came into play: be coûte que coûte backwards compatible, port all the bugs, do not disturb anything. * A second reason might be that TS people might not want to learn .net because of vibes. Do not underestimate vibes. Almost everyday on HN I see Python programs being posted where most often the creator would be better of if they had learned some next programming language. Decisions are seldomly made on a technical basis. We as humans decide emotionally, sometimes with rationalizations afterwards. And so, maybe Anders was rational in acknowledging the dev-social situation as is. Whatever the reason, this will not be without consequences. The team now has to invest in GO and now depends on Google to take TS forward. And yes, this is also typical MS, one department can easily undo the other. TLDR: the technical arguments were mostly nonsense, but the real arguments have likely more to do with age-old reflexes and dev-cultural issues.