Yet one is technical and the one you actually got a negative opinion about a programming language supposedly isn't?

I knew it was gonna happen at one point, guess I didn't believe it'd happen so soon, but I still can't believe that nowadays people make choices about what programming language to used based on what semi-celebrity they like the most, and it's all about emotional arguments. What happened and since when is this the way people make technical choices? I feel like I woke up in an alternative universe.

▲

pdimitar 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You are reaching quite a bit, and misrepresenting too.

But it's actually as simple as: Jarred's post was mature and didn't throw shade; Andrew's threw quite a bit of it while insisting it did not.

I and many others don't want to be slandered or trash-talked if we moved away from a language we previously chose. That can and has had actual business impact on projects / companies in the past. So naturally, people will judge you if you cannot be mature when responding to an event that made some splash in the ecosystem.

▲

frde_me an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> what semi-celebrity they like the most

The language in question here is maintained by a BDFL, which means that one person has outsized influence on the language, and it's direction.

In this context, I find it reasonable that if someone is ticked off by that BDFL, they might second guess the direction of the language itself. Since the opinions and emotions of that BDFL _will_ end up in the language and it's community.

This is different than some un-associated influencer having an opinion, and using that to choose a language.

	▲	embedding-shape an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> The language in question here is maintained by a BDFL, which means that one person has outsized influence on the language, and it's direction. Seems like a strange perspective, isn't it expected (and even wanted) that if you have a BDFL, they have the most influence on the language and its direction? That's why they're BDFL, that cannot be outsized, it's perfectly sized for what it's explicitly trying to be, that's the entire point. > In this context, I find it reasonable that if someone is ticked off by that BDFL, they might second guess the direction of the language itself. Since the opinions and emotions of that BDFL _will_ end up in the language and it's community. Yeah, I suppose in the new daily reality where we care more about what opinions people hold, rather than what quality, reliability and so on they actually produce, this does make a lot of sense. Personally I never used Linux because of how much I love/despise Torvalds, I've basically never cared about what he thinks, never thought it was important either, as long as Linux continues to work for me.

▲

woodruffw 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I didn’t say the other wasn’t technical.

(I also don’t have any opinions about micro-celebrities or whatever else. I don’t know Jarred or Andrew, and I have priors about JavaScript that in any other context would naturally bias me against Bun. But the Zig post’s flaws are, in my opinion, not ignorable.)

▲

embedding-shape 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> I didn’t say the other wasn’t technical.

What was the technical parts of Zig's post that made you leave with a negative opinion of Zig then? Something doesn't add up here.

	▲	woodruffw 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The technical content of the Andrew’s post didn’t leave me with a negative opinion. To quote my original comment: > When I read the post, my first thought was that I wouldn’t want to build things in Zig, because any technical decision I make, good or bad, might subject me to this kind of article from their BDFL. I can’t conceive of the leadership of the Python or Rust or any other community I’ve ever worked with doing something like that. This is the negative opinion in question.

▲

themgt 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yet one is technical and the one you actually got a negative opinion about a programming language supposedly isn't?

Yes, on the one hand here's "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" and on the other hand here's my blog "embedding-shape is a stinky slop beginner shit show"

And yet you got a negative opinion of me from the "embedding-shape is a stinky slop hack beginner shit show" post rather than SICP? I feel like I woke up in an alternative universe!