5 ms·

> Folks, why are you upvoting this? Mostly, because it's funny. What's even funnier is how people take this sort of stuff personally. I use Node, I know its l

by maratd 13y ago

> Folks, why are you upvoting this? Mostly, because it's funny. What's even funnier is how people take this sort of stuff personally. I use Node, I know its limitations. I also use PHP. And Ruby. And Python. I use everything. I like having a full toolbox. These languages are just that. Tools. If you went up to a carpenter and made fun of his hammer, do you really think he'll be pissed? He knows what his hammer is capable of and doesn't need anyone else to tell him. A better question would be why this sort of commentary starts flame wars?

WoodenChair 13y ago
This is not directed at your comment individually, nor is it anything about your content in particular... but IF I HAVE TO HEAR THE TOOL/TOOLSET ANALOGY ONE MORE TIME to describe programming languages, I think I will... be disappointed in your lack of creativity. Really, don't you guys have any other analogies in your "toolbox"?
- GhotiFish 13y ago
  Yes! I have the car analogy in my toolbox as well!
- jiggy2011 13y ago
  It's not even that great an analogy. If I use a particular hammer to build a table then I could throw it away at the end because it is no longer important as long as the nails are in the right place. I could even use a different hammer to drive every single nail if I wanted to and it wouldn't matter. Languages , libraries , frameworks and runtimes on the other hand literally become a part of the end product. In many (maybe most) programs the total LOC count for the project is dominated by third party code vs original work. So in this case they are not the tools, they are the nails.
  - Double_Cast 13y ago
    Some analogies are more robust than others. But all analogies snap when stretched too far. I think this is one of those cases where you unfairly stretched it too far. hammer : painting :: tool : finished_product Though cliche, it's not like the analogy is misleading. Nails might not be "tools" since they can't normally be used on the next project, like a hammer can. But nails are still a means to an end, e.g. "hang painting on wall". If we really wanted to, we could stretch the analogy ad infinitum. "What's the nail represent? What's the room represent? Who bought the painting? etc." But the purpose of an analogy isn't to draw parallels between the objects' irrelevant particulars. Its purpose is to abstract from the objects an equivalency of relationship (i.e. means/end). In this case, I think the equivalency is preserved even after we extended our analogy in ways it was never intended to be.
    - jiggy2011 13y ago
      It depends on the point that you are using the analogy to support. The tool analogy often gets trotted out to make an argument about something like language or framework choice not being important to the success of a project, but I think that the analogy becomes very brittle here for the reasons stated. Deciding to switch something like a hammer (or text editor) mid project is likely not a big deal but switching to another language or framework can be an ordeal that requires planning. Since software projects are almost never "done" until they are obsolete the choice of language can have significant implications down the road that you wouldn't have if it was simply a "tool".
      - Double_Cast 13y ago
        I think I understand what you're saying now. My mistake was reading "the tool analogy is undeservingly cliche/popular because it's rarely accurate" vs "the tool analogy is doesn't apply in this instance (to programming languages) because hammers don't have lasting side effects".
    - bradleyland 13y ago
      At some point in any rational discourse, all analogies become tortured analogies. The trick is in not focusing on how the analogy is wrong, but in what can be improved about the underlying idea. By all means, cast the analogy aside, for it is worthless on its own. It is only a means to relate to or understand the underlying idea. Any time you feel inclined to dig-in and tear apart an analogy, it's wise to consider whether you're contributing to the refinement of the underlying idea, or just bikeshedding.
- d0m 13y ago
  It's not really an analogy though.. Languages, technologies and frameworks are just tools to build stuff. Said differently, to build stuff, you need tools. Programming languages are programmers' tools..
  - WoodenChair 13y ago
    It is though, because they're usually referring to woodworking tools or car fixing tools - not the generalized term "tools".
    - maratd 13y ago
      > because they're usually referring to woodworking tools Says the guy with the wooden name!
jepsen 13y ago
I use node, .net, java, php, python, ruby, different horses for different courses. Sounds like this guy just loves to argue, bet he's fun to work with....

by maratd 13y ago

WoodenChair 13y ago

This is not directed at your comment individually, nor is it anything about your content in particular... but IF I HAVE TO HEAR THE TOOL/TOOLSET ANALOGY ONE MORE TIME to describe programming languages, I think I will... be disappointed in your lack of creativity. Really, don't you guys have any other analogies in your "toolbox"?

GhotiFish 13y ago
Yes! I have the car analogy in my toolbox as well!
jiggy2011 13y ago
It's not even that great an analogy. If I use a particular hammer to build a table then I could throw it away at the end because it is no longer important as long as the nails are in the right place. I could even use a different hammer to drive every single nail if I wanted to and it wouldn't matter. Languages , libraries , frameworks and runtimes on the other hand literally become a part of the end product. In many (maybe most) programs the total LOC count for the project is dominated by third party code vs original work. So in this case they are not the tools, they are the nails.
- Double_Cast 13y ago
  Some analogies are more robust than others. But all analogies snap when stretched too far. I think this is one of those cases where you unfairly stretched it too far. hammer : painting :: tool : finished_product Though cliche, it's not like the analogy is misleading. Nails might not be "tools" since they can't normally be used on the next project, like a hammer can. But nails are still a means to an end, e.g. "hang painting on wall". If we really wanted to, we could stretch the analogy ad infinitum. "What's the nail represent? What's the room represent? Who bought the painting? etc." But the purpose of an analogy isn't to draw parallels between the objects' irrelevant particulars. Its purpose is to abstract from the objects an equivalency of relationship (i.e. means/end). In this case, I think the equivalency is preserved even after we extended our analogy in ways it was never intended to be.
  - jiggy2011 13y ago
    It depends on the point that you are using the analogy to support. The tool analogy often gets trotted out to make an argument about something like language or framework choice not being important to the success of a project, but I think that the analogy becomes very brittle here for the reasons stated. Deciding to switch something like a hammer (or text editor) mid project is likely not a big deal but switching to another language or framework can be an ordeal that requires planning. Since software projects are almost never "done" until they are obsolete the choice of language can have significant implications down the road that you wouldn't have if it was simply a "tool".
    - Double_Cast 13y ago
      I think I understand what you're saying now. My mistake was reading "the tool analogy is undeservingly cliche/popular because it's rarely accurate" vs "the tool analogy is doesn't apply in this instance (to programming languages) because hammers don't have lasting side effects".
  - bradleyland 13y ago
    At some point in any rational discourse, all analogies become tortured analogies. The trick is in not focusing on how the analogy is wrong, but in what can be improved about the underlying idea. By all means, cast the analogy aside, for it is worthless on its own. It is only a means to relate to or understand the underlying idea. Any time you feel inclined to dig-in and tear apart an analogy, it's wise to consider whether you're contributing to the refinement of the underlying idea, or just bikeshedding.
d0m 13y ago
It's not really an analogy though.. Languages, technologies and frameworks are just tools to build stuff. Said differently, to build stuff, you need tools. Programming languages are programmers' tools..
- WoodenChair 13y ago
  It is though, because they're usually referring to woodworking tools or car fixing tools - not the generalized term "tools".
  - maratd 13y ago
    > because they're usually referring to woodworking tools Says the guy with the wooden name!

jepsen 13y ago

I use node, .net, java, php, python, ruby, different horses for different courses. Sounds like this guy just loves to argue, bet he's fun to work with....