3 ms·

> Software has been getting slower at a rate roughly equivalent to the rate at which computers are getting faster. Cite? This problem statement is also such a

> Software has been getting slower at a rate roughly equivalent to the rate at which computers are getting faster. Cite? This problem statement is also such a weird introduction to specifically this new programming language. Yes, compiled languages with no GC are faster than the alternatives. But the problem is and was not the alternatives. Those alternatives fill the vast majority of computing uses and work well enough. The problem is compiled languages with no GC, before Rust, were bug prone, and difficult to use safely. So -- why are we talking about this? Because jblow won't stop catastrophizing. He has led a generation of impressionable programmers to believe that we in some dark age of software, when that statement couldn't be further from the truth.

topspin 2y ago
I carefully watched a number of the early jai language YouTube videos. Some of his opinions on non-programming topics are just goofy: I recall him ranting (and I wish I could find it again,) about the supposed pointlessness of logarithmic scales (decibels, etc.,) vs scientific notation and experiencing a pretty bad cringe spasm. jblow's words are not the Gospel on high.
troupo 2y ago
> He has led a generation of impressionable programmers to believe that we in some dark age of software, when that statement couldn't be further from the truth. Have you actually used modern software? There's a great rant about Visual Studio debugger which in recent versions cannot even update debugged values as you step through the program unlike its predecessors: https://youtu.be/GC-0tCy4P1U?si=t6BsHkHhoRF46mYM https://youtu.be/GC-0tCy4P1U?si=t6BsHkHhoRF46mYM And this is professional software. There's state of personal software is worse. Most programs cannot show a page of text with a few images without consuming gigabytes of RAM and not-insignificant percentages of CPU.
- mustache_kimono 2y ago
  > Have you actually used modern software? Uh, yes. When was software better (like when was America great)? Do you remember what Windows and Linux and MacOS were like in 90s? What exactly is the software we are comparing? > There's a great rant about Visual Studio debugger Yeah, I'm not sure these are "great rants" as you say. Most are about how software with different constraints than video games aren't made with same constraints as video games. Can you believe it?
  - rk06 2y ago
    I am told that in Visual Studio 2008, you could debug line by line, and it was smooth. Like there was zero lag. Then Microsoft rewrite VS from c++ into c# and it became much slower Modern software is indeed slow especially when you consider how fast modern hardware is. If you want to feel the difference, try highly optimised software against a popular one. For eg: linux vs windows, windows explorer vs filepilot, zed vs vscode.
    - mustache_kimono 2y ago
      > I am told that in Visual Studio 2008, you could debug line by line, and it was smooth. Like there was zero lag. Then Microsoft rewrite VS from c++ into c# and it became much slower Not exactly a surprise? Microsoft made a choice to move to C# and the code was slower? Says precious little about software in general and much more about the constraints of modern development. > If you want to feel the difference, try highly optimised software against a popular one. For eg: linux vs windows, windows explorer vs filepilot, zed vs vscode. This reasoning is bonkers. Compare vastly different software with a vastly different design center to something only in the same vague class of systems? If the question is "Is software getting worse or better?", doesn't it make more sense to compare newer software to the same old software? Again -- do you remember what Windows and Linux and MacOS were like in 90s? Do you not believe they have improved?
      - troupo 2y ago
        "our computers are thousands of times faster and more powerful than computers from the 90s and early 2000s, so of course it makes sense that 'constraints of development' make it impossible to make a working debugger on a modern supercomputer due to ... reasons. Doesn't mean this applies to all software ... which is written by same developers in same conditions on same machines in same languages for same OSes"
        mustache_kimono 2y ago
        > so of course it makes sense that 'constraints of development' make it impossible to make a working debugger All of these examples are Microsoft is not building X as well as it used to, which is entirely possible. However, Microsoft choosing to move languages says something entirely different to me than simply -- software somehow got worse. It says to me that devs weren't using C++ effectively. It says to me that a tradeoff was made re: raw performance for more flexibility and features. No one sets out to make slow software. Microsoft made a choice. At least think about why that might be.

topspin 2y ago

I carefully watched a number of the early jai language YouTube videos. Some of his opinions on non-programming topics are just goofy: I recall him ranting (and I wish I could find it again,) about the supposed pointlessness of logarithmic scales (decibels, etc.,) vs scientific notation and experiencing a pretty bad cringe spasm. jblow's words are not the Gospel on high.

troupo 2y ago

> He has led a generation of impressionable programmers to believe that we in some dark age of software, when that statement couldn't be further from the truth. Have you actually used modern software? There's a great rant about Visual Studio debugger which in recent versions cannot even update debugged values as you step through the program unlike its predecessors: https://youtu.be/GC-0tCy4P1U?si=t6BsHkHhoRF46mYM https://youtu.be/GC-0tCy4P1U?si=t6BsHkHhoRF46mYM And this is professional software. There's state of personal software is worse. Most programs cannot show a page of text with a few images without consuming gigabytes of RAM and not-insignificant percentages of CPU.

mustache_kimono 2y ago
> Have you actually used modern software? Uh, yes. When was software better (like when was America great)? Do you remember what Windows and Linux and MacOS were like in 90s? What exactly is the software we are comparing? > There's a great rant about Visual Studio debugger Yeah, I'm not sure these are "great rants" as you say. Most are about how software with different constraints than video games aren't made with same constraints as video games. Can you believe it?
- rk06 2y ago
  I am told that in Visual Studio 2008, you could debug line by line, and it was smooth. Like there was zero lag. Then Microsoft rewrite VS from c++ into c# and it became much slower Modern software is indeed slow especially when you consider how fast modern hardware is. If you want to feel the difference, try highly optimised software against a popular one. For eg: linux vs windows, windows explorer vs filepilot, zed vs vscode.
  - mustache_kimono 2y ago
    > I am told that in Visual Studio 2008, you could debug line by line, and it was smooth. Like there was zero lag. Then Microsoft rewrite VS from c++ into c# and it became much slower Not exactly a surprise? Microsoft made a choice to move to C# and the code was slower? Says precious little about software in general and much more about the constraints of modern development. > If you want to feel the difference, try highly optimised software against a popular one. For eg: linux vs windows, windows explorer vs filepilot, zed vs vscode. This reasoning is bonkers. Compare vastly different software with a vastly different design center to something only in the same vague class of systems? If the question is "Is software getting worse or better?", doesn't it make more sense to compare newer software to the same old software? Again -- do you remember what Windows and Linux and MacOS were like in 90s? Do you not believe they have improved?
    - troupo 2y ago
      "our computers are thousands of times faster and more powerful than computers from the 90s and early 2000s, so of course it makes sense that 'constraints of development' make it impossible to make a working debugger on a modern supercomputer due to ... reasons. Doesn't mean this applies to all software ... which is written by same developers in same conditions on same machines in same languages for same OSes"
      - mustache_kimono 2y ago
        > so of course it makes sense that 'constraints of development' make it impossible to make a working debugger All of these examples are Microsoft is not building X as well as it used to, which is entirely possible. However, Microsoft choosing to move languages says something entirely different to me than simply -- software somehow got worse. It says to me that devs weren't using C++ effectively. It says to me that a tradeoff was made re: raw performance for more flexibility and features. No one sets out to make slow software. Microsoft made a choice. At least think about why that might be.