3 ms·

Odin is extremely well known to every human being who keeps up on programming language development, along with Zig, Nim, D, Jai, V, Crystal, Carbon, and others.

by jibal 4mo ago

Odin is extremely well known to every human being who keeps up on programming language development, along with Zig, Nim, D, Jai, V, Crystal, Carbon, and others. "programming topics" isn't relevant.

woodruffw 4mo ago
I keep up with PL development, and I am only vaguely aware of Odin (and same for Jai and V). (But this isn’t the point: lots of programmers know about relatively obscure thing, but that does not itself make them notable. Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia.)
- jibal 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - woodruffw 4mo ago
    Thank you, that’s very persuasive.
  - jibal 4mo ago
    What should be persuasive is a simple logical inference from the statements made to my conclusion. From the article: > If you are terminally online on programming circles, you most likely have heard of Odin, it's so obvious that I don't feel like I have to make a case at all. It has been covered by the streamer Primeagen and it's used commercially by JangaFX, that's pretty notable to me. If you are active in discussions of other systems programming languages like Zig, Nim, Jai, D, V, Hare, C3, etc. then you have heard of Odin. If someone hasn't heard of all of those languages then it's an objective fact that they don't "keep up with PL development". See for instance https://dev.to/dimension-ai/13-languages-are-challenging-c-most-fail-only-five-stack-up-2no5 https://dev.to/dimension-ai/13-languages-are-challenging-c-m... Deletion of this article is an indication of inadequate processes at Wikipedia for determining the notability of certain sorts of subjects. > Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia. This is not true ... if it were then there would not be disputes about notability. And simply reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability makes it clear that it is not "a well-defined property". And beyond that, one of the points being discussed is that Wikipedia's criteria for notability have not adapted to the current state of affairs. If Wikipedia did have a rigid "well-defined property", that would be a mistake. As GingerBill is quoted as saying in TFA: > Odin is now being used by dozens of companies, thousands of public projects, and over a million hobbyists. By a sensible rational evaluation, that makes it notable.
    - Barrin92 4mo ago
      No it's an indication that notoriety in Discord servers isn't a basis for relevance in an encyclopedia. Which is a good choice. A streamer mentioned a language? Wikipedia isn't Twitter. As a reader thank god not everything that has grabbed the attention of social media gets an article.
      - jibal 4mo ago
        I'm talking about a universe of developing systems programming languages, not "the attention of social media" -- that's a silly shallow bad faith reduction. And I see that elsewhere you have written "a archive for whatever trends on social media, which seems to be the articles criterion for the relevance of Odin" -- it doesn't seem that way to anyone who is remotely intellectually honest ... clearly it is ideology about the scope of Wikipedia articles that is work here totally independently of any knowledge of or details about Odin. There is also virtually no attention in these comments to the content of TFA, e.g., > the entire point of this article is to counter the social media persona where dunking by performative disinterest and uncuriosity are a virtue and rewarded by engagement and short-term reward structures. Anyway, the Wikipedia article was deleted -- you won. People are still entitled to think that it was a mistake and to say why.
        bawolff 4mo ago
        > I'm talking about a universe of developing systems programming languages Are you though? Like this seems like hobby project that hasn't really generated much discussion or interest in the broader programming language community, and practically speaking doesn't seem to have seen much use as a systems programming language (a single vfx package isn't really that impressive). People seem to get offended by the notion that this language is obscure and hasn't generated much interest, and yet they don't seem to offer any counter examples.
        jibal 4mo ago
        > Are you though? Yes ... read the other comments and TFA that you have completely ignored. And I wouldn't have said that I was talking about that if I weren't talking about that. > People seem to get offended by the notion that this language is obscure and hasn't generated much interest Nonsense. > and yet they don't seem to offer any counter examples. Nonsense. (These statements individually and together are literally incoherent.) The bad faith here is tiresome. Virtually no one has even read TFA, which is actually a defense of Wikipedia and devolves into an attack on Ginger Bill for following right wingers on Twitter. (And I'm no fan of those people, to say the least, but they have nothing to do with the notability of Odin.)
- stymaar 4mo ago
  This exactly! There are probably thousands of JavaScript packages on NPM that are more well-known than Odin, that doesn't mean they deserve their own Wikipedia page.
- FullGarden_S 4mo ago
  You make it sound like you're confusing popularity with notability. Unlike Jai and V, Odin has been in commercial use(JangaFX) for years now with several high performance computing products written entirely in Odin and the customers of JangaFX includes several AAA video game and VFX corporations. A lot of programmers not knowing or the language not being mainstream does not mean that its non-existent. The Notability of Wikipedia is just the involved admin's opinionated bias. As simple as that. Its always been like that and it'll probably always be like that as Wikipedia seems like it isn't are capable of operating while changing that.
  - woodruffw 4mo ago
    Notability is a qualified state on Wikipedia, as both TFA and Wikipedia itself document. One of the qualifications is having third-party sources document the subject, where those third-party sources are themselves notable and reputable (in the subject area). A company’s statement that it uses a programming language might be factual, but that doesn’t necessarily make it notable. (To be clear: I was only vaguely aware of Odin, and I have no idea who/what JangaFX. But that isn’t dispositive.)
    - FullGarden_S 4mo ago
      To be clear, I was not talking about Odin specifically. This is about notability in general. >where those third-party sources are themselves notable and reputable (in the subject area) this is where the bias kicks in. It would be great if Wikipedia's notability goes "All youtube sources are not reliable" but instead its always phrased like "Some Youtube sources are not reliable" and what qualifies as this "some" is usually decided by the personal bias of the admins.
      - woodruffw 4mo ago
        > It would be great if Wikipedia's notability goes "All youtube sources are not reliable" but instead its always phrased like "Some Youtube sources are not reliable" and what qualifies as this "some" is usually decided by the personal bias of the admins. You can read the policy yourself[1]. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me at all. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links

by jibal 4mo ago

Odin is extremely well known to every human being who keeps up on programming language development, along with Zig, Nim, D, Jai, V, Crystal, Carbon, and others. "programming topics" isn't relevant.

woodruffw 4mo ago

I keep up with PL development, and I am only vaguely aware of Odin (and same for Jai and V). (But this isn’t the point: lots of programmers know about relatively obscure thing, but that does not itself make them notable. Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia.)

jibal 4mo ago
[flagged]
- woodruffw 4mo ago
  Thank you, that’s very persuasive.
- jibal 4mo ago
  What should be persuasive is a simple logical inference from the statements made to my conclusion. From the article: > If you are terminally online on programming circles, you most likely have heard of Odin, it's so obvious that I don't feel like I have to make a case at all. It has been covered by the streamer Primeagen and it's used commercially by JangaFX, that's pretty notable to me. If you are active in discussions of other systems programming languages like Zig, Nim, Jai, D, V, Hare, C3, etc. then you have heard of Odin. If someone hasn't heard of all of those languages then it's an objective fact that they don't "keep up with PL development". See for instance https://dev.to/dimension-ai/13-languages-are-challenging-c-most-fail-only-five-stack-up-2no5 https://dev.to/dimension-ai/13-languages-are-challenging-c-m... Deletion of this article is an indication of inadequate processes at Wikipedia for determining the notability of certain sorts of subjects. > Notability is a well-defined property on Wikipedia. This is not true ... if it were then there would not be disputes about notability. And simply reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability makes it clear that it is not "a well-defined property". And beyond that, one of the points being discussed is that Wikipedia's criteria for notability have not adapted to the current state of affairs. If Wikipedia did have a rigid "well-defined property", that would be a mistake. As GingerBill is quoted as saying in TFA: > Odin is now being used by dozens of companies, thousands of public projects, and over a million hobbyists. By a sensible rational evaluation, that makes it notable.
  - Barrin92 4mo ago
    No it's an indication that notoriety in Discord servers isn't a basis for relevance in an encyclopedia. Which is a good choice. A streamer mentioned a language? Wikipedia isn't Twitter. As a reader thank god not everything that has grabbed the attention of social media gets an article.
    - jibal 4mo ago
      I'm talking about a universe of developing systems programming languages, not "the attention of social media" -- that's a silly shallow bad faith reduction. And I see that elsewhere you have written "a archive for whatever trends on social media, which seems to be the articles criterion for the relevance of Odin" -- it doesn't seem that way to anyone who is remotely intellectually honest ... clearly it is ideology about the scope of Wikipedia articles that is work here totally independently of any knowledge of or details about Odin. There is also virtually no attention in these comments to the content of TFA, e.g., > the entire point of this article is to counter the social media persona where dunking by performative disinterest and uncuriosity are a virtue and rewarded by engagement and short-term reward structures. Anyway, the Wikipedia article was deleted -- you won. People are still entitled to think that it was a mistake and to say why.
      - bawolff 4mo ago
        > I'm talking about a universe of developing systems programming languages Are you though? Like this seems like hobby project that hasn't really generated much discussion or interest in the broader programming language community, and practically speaking doesn't seem to have seen much use as a systems programming language (a single vfx package isn't really that impressive). People seem to get offended by the notion that this language is obscure and hasn't generated much interest, and yet they don't seem to offer any counter examples.
        jibal 4mo ago
        > Are you though? Yes ... read the other comments and TFA that you have completely ignored. And I wouldn't have said that I was talking about that if I weren't talking about that. > People seem to get offended by the notion that this language is obscure and hasn't generated much interest Nonsense. > and yet they don't seem to offer any counter examples. Nonsense. (These statements individually and together are literally incoherent.) The bad faith here is tiresome. Virtually no one has even read TFA, which is actually a defense of Wikipedia and devolves into an attack on Ginger Bill for following right wingers on Twitter. (And I'm no fan of those people, to say the least, but they have nothing to do with the notability of Odin.)
stymaar 4mo ago
This exactly! There are probably thousands of JavaScript packages on NPM that are more well-known than Odin, that doesn't mean they deserve their own Wikipedia page.
FullGarden_S 4mo ago
You make it sound like you're confusing popularity with notability. Unlike Jai and V, Odin has been in commercial use(JangaFX) for years now with several high performance computing products written entirely in Odin and the customers of JangaFX includes several AAA video game and VFX corporations. A lot of programmers not knowing or the language not being mainstream does not mean that its non-existent. The Notability of Wikipedia is just the involved admin's opinionated bias. As simple as that. Its always been like that and it'll probably always be like that as Wikipedia seems like it isn't are capable of operating while changing that.
- woodruffw 4mo ago
  Notability is a qualified state on Wikipedia, as both TFA and Wikipedia itself document. One of the qualifications is having third-party sources document the subject, where those third-party sources are themselves notable and reputable (in the subject area). A company’s statement that it uses a programming language might be factual, but that doesn’t necessarily make it notable. (To be clear: I was only vaguely aware of Odin, and I have no idea who/what JangaFX. But that isn’t dispositive.)
  - FullGarden_S 4mo ago
    To be clear, I was not talking about Odin specifically. This is about notability in general. >where those third-party sources are themselves notable and reputable (in the subject area) this is where the bias kicks in. It would be great if Wikipedia's notability goes "All youtube sources are not reliable" but instead its always phrased like "Some Youtube sources are not reliable" and what qualifies as this "some" is usually decided by the personal bias of the admins.
    - woodruffw 4mo ago
      > It would be great if Wikipedia's notability goes "All youtube sources are not reliable" but instead its always phrased like "Some Youtube sources are not reliable" and what qualifies as this "some" is usually decided by the personal bias of the admins. You can read the policy yourself[1]. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me at all. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Video_links