4 ms·

That's what I mean. Why should I even care about stuff like this being "considered poor style" by the creators of Rust? "Poor style" is what doesn't work well f

That's what I mean. Why should I even care about stuff like this being "considered poor style" by the creators of Rust? "Poor style" is what doesn't work well for my team and me.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> Why should I even care about stuff like this being "considered poor style" by the creators of Rust? Maybe you are writing code for the Rust standard library, where following the core projects style recommendations would be important for consistency. Maybe you don't want to start from scratch coming up with your own style, and want a decent starting point from which you can vary as your team figures out what does/doesn't work for them. Lots of reasons to have a language project also provide default style recommendations.
- andresmanz 11y ago
  Style recommendations are great and if I was writing code for the standard library, I would certainly follow them. But they don't simply recommend their style. "We recommend doing this like that" is very different from "Doing this that way is considered poor style". That sounds like their recommendations were objective facts and you shouldn't do anything else, even if that worked better for you and the majority of other programmers.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > That sounds like their recommendations were objective facts On the one hand, it is an objective fact that it is considered, by the authors, poor style. On the other hand, that it is "considered" anything is an explicit (not merely implicit) statement that it is subjective (and "poor style" -- or good style, for that matter is inherently subjective in any case.) So, characterizing that language as making it sound "like their recommendations are objective facts" seems quite bizarre.
    - andresmanz 11y ago
      You can say that it can be an objective fact, though, that the majority of 'good developers' considers all that stuff poor style. Which is what I get from reading that book. If they don't intend to imply that, they should write it in a different way. The authors of various other books on various other programming languages are able to do that.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

That's what I mean. Why should I even care about stuff like this being "considered poor style" by the creators of Rust? "Poor style" is what doesn't work well for my team and me.

dragonwriter 11y ago

> Why should I even care about stuff like this being "considered poor style" by the creators of Rust? Maybe you are writing code for the Rust standard library, where following the core projects style recommendations would be important for consistency. Maybe you don't want to start from scratch coming up with your own style, and want a decent starting point from which you can vary as your team figures out what does/doesn't work for them. Lots of reasons to have a language project also provide default style recommendations.

andresmanz 11y ago
Style recommendations are great and if I was writing code for the standard library, I would certainly follow them. But they don't simply recommend their style. "We recommend doing this like that" is very different from "Doing this that way is considered poor style". That sounds like their recommendations were objective facts and you shouldn't do anything else, even if that worked better for you and the majority of other programmers.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > That sounds like their recommendations were objective facts On the one hand, it is an objective fact that it is considered, by the authors, poor style. On the other hand, that it is "considered" anything is an explicit (not merely implicit) statement that it is subjective (and "poor style" -- or good style, for that matter is inherently subjective in any case.) So, characterizing that language as making it sound "like their recommendations are objective facts" seems quite bizarre.
  - andresmanz 11y ago
    You can say that it can be an objective fact, though, that the majority of 'good developers' considers all that stuff poor style. Which is what I get from reading that book. If they don't intend to imply that, they should write it in a different way. The authors of various other books on various other programming languages are able to do that.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]