Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 28th Jul 2013 14:06 UTC
General Development "There is a reason I use 'old' languages like J or Lush. It's not a retro affectation; I save that for my suits. These languages are designed better than modern ones. There is some survivor bias here; nobody slings PL/1 or Cobol willingly, but modern language and package designers don't seem to learn much from the masters. Modern code monkeys don't even recognize mastery; mastery is measured in dollars or number of users, which is a poor substitute for distinguishing between what is good and what is dumb. Lady Gaga made more money than Beethoven, but, like, so what?" This isn't just a thing among programmers. The entire industry is obsessed with user numbers, number of applications, and other crap that is meaningless when you consider programming to be art. When I post a new item about some small hobby operating system, the comments will be filled with negativity because it's no Windows or iOS, whereas only ten years ago, we'd have lively discussions about the implementation details. And then people wonder why that scene has died out.
Permalink for comment 568180
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Art or engineering?
by dpJudas on Sun 28th Jul 2013 15:58 UTC
dpJudas
Member since:
2009-12-10

I absolutely love to code, it is my favorite hobby, but I am not really sure it qualifies as art. In my view it is more like math or chess, where certain solutions can be beautiful or brilliantly designed or executed. The heart of coding is more logic than creativity.

As for why small hobby project postings are filled with negativity, I think it has partly to do with developers (and users) investing greatly in whatever tools they learn, and therefore they have a huge interest in what becomes the winning horse. If a hobby project attempts something that differs from their horse, some react by attacking the project.

Another reason is probably that most basic OS stuff has matured to the level where there is now a standard solution proved by the test of time. This means that whenever someone tries something different, you will have hordes pointing out all the features missing.

Reply Score: 3