6 ms·

> Casey Muratori and Jon Blow have pushed this concept frequently Ah... The school of what I like to call "maximum opinions and minimal evidence". Aggressive a

• christophilus 3mo ago
  I can see why you would think that about Jon Blow, though I disagree. But Casey? He has a number of thorough videos with plenty of evidence, and has never struck me as arrogant.
• indy 3mo ago
  "coupled with a complete lack of _hard evidence_ to back up their views" Didn't Casey Muratori write a proof of concept windows terminal to highlight Microsoft's substandard implementation? And Jonathan Blow has spent the past decade+ developing his own programming language and funding the development of a game. Seems like they are backing their views.
• jstimpfle 3mo ago
  Apparently you're the school of dismissive person who can't even be bothered to look up their technical achievements.
  • CyberDildonics 3mo ago
    Confusing achievements in one area for evidence in another is literally an appeal to authority fallacy.
    • jstimpfle 3mo ago
      You must mean confusing achievements in the area of creating large maintainable and performant systems on the one hand, with achievements in the area of creating large maintainable and performant systems on the other hand? And let me incude Ryan Fleury here who graduated from Casey-school with honors, he is maybe the most impressive programmer I know. His work on the raddebugger is outstanding.
      • CyberDildonics 3mo ago
        You're still not anywhere close to the thread's topic. Hero worship isn't evidence. C++’ish approach to memory management (RAII) - that’s not how systems programming or games (I’m told) tend to work This is the statement that no one seems to be able to back up. Instead it's fans of some internet programmers saying that they must be right about everything because they shipped a game. I actually like hearing what they have to say, but they aren't right about this and there is no evidence or explanation here from you, them or anyone else. Instead you start talking about a third person making a debugger for some reason as if the solution to appealing to authority is more appealing to authority.
        • jstimpfle 3mo ago
          > This is the statement that no one seems to be able to back up. Actually there are many explanations of systemic issues arising from reliance on RAII. Both Jon and Casey are very good explaining the matters. > Instead you start talking about a third person making a debugger for some reason as if the solution to appealing to authority is more appealing to authority. A third person (already mentioned in a parent comment), who is creating an extremely snappy and powerful debugger using those exact approaches under discussion.
          • CyberDildonics 3mo ago
            Actually there are many explanations So lets hear them. A third person (already mentioned in a parent comment), who is creating an extremely snappy and powerful debugger Who cares? They have nothing to do with anything, why are you avoiding a technical discussion of facts to talk about your favorite influencers?
            • jstimpfle 3mo ago
              > So lets hear them. There are few people delivering more in-depth explanations of their claims, like literally thousands of hours of content. You can just look it up. If you disagree, please disagree. Personally I find what they say articulates almost 100% of my independent experience. And I do systems programming in C++ full-time (file systems / desktop app infrastructure). Personally I've made at least 9 serious attempts of building robust and maintainable systems on top of C++ features like RAII and templates and have always returned to simple straightforward C-style code. And I've had to work many times with existing C++ codebases that had bought into these features, and it always seemed like a giant waste of time, a way to add more spaghettis to a hot mess. And also, any technically convincing C++ codebase I've seen always seemed to make only very light use of C++ features. Not going to argue more here. > Who cares? They have nothing to do with anything Quite the opposite, it's a third person from the same circle making the same kind of claims (there are more persons), who have, contrary to what you say, actual evidence to back up their claims. You could just go ahead and check these works out yourself and see if it convinces you that the methods they claim to be better are actually better.
• kasumispencer2 3mo ago
  "Aggressive arrogant dismissal of anything except their exact view" Man, if only someone around here had even if just an inch of self-awareness...