Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.programming > #16816
| From | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.programming |
| Subject | Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? |
| Date | 2025-07-28 17:59 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10686pv$24rjd$5@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <vqmi1p$f1f$1@reader1.panix.com> <dfKdnVPGfK2J_8_1nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com> <1067ndk$qka$1@reader1.panix.com> <1067o6p$24rjd$2@dont-email.me> <106847g$33e$1@reader1.panix.com> |
On 28/07/2025 17:16, Dan Cross wrote: > In article <1067o6p$24rjd$2@dont-email.me>, > Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> wrote: >> On 28/07/2025 13:37, Dan Cross wrote: <snip> >> IOW, the idea that programmers in general need to be baby-seated > > I wouldn't phrase it as "babysitting". Rather, it's > professionals making conscious choices about their tools to most > effectively do their jobs. > >> instead of given control I find not just self-defeating but really >> fallacious. > > In what way do you feel you have less control (and over what?) > in Rust than in, say, C? To be clear, I have nothing against the institution of a comp.lang.rust (on the contrary, I'd be tempted to say), nor against the Rust language itself: I am rather commenting on some questions of principle, and maybe some marketing slogans, especially on the themes of "safety" on a side and "assisted" programming on the other. Indeed, I am not against a stratification of languages from lower to higher level either, actually that's quite needed, I am just of the idea that programmers should not be "protected" by anybody but more competent programmers: but of course with that goes a quite different idea of what *software development* means, and to me it does not primarily mean we buy "solutions" at the shop, the very opposite of that. Instead we get an inversion of the chain of control and of responsibility that is rather one of the key ingredients, the other being the denial of the very state of the art, of the disaster that the whole industry has been made into across the last ~30 years... ...and the self-fulfilling prophecies, since average is the data, averaging are and have been the policies, average are the results, and the circle is closed: with the triumph of the levelling down to ineptitude and consumeristic dependence. Here is rather an analogy: go tell a race car driver that it is "unsafe" for them to touch their breaks in a turn, and that you actually have a "solution" in mind that will automatically disable the breaks in a turn (and punish the driver for it)... or something along that line. Here is not an analogy: only a competent programmer knows the discipline, the principles, the practices, and in fact how to organise not only a production unit that delivers excellent products, but also that continually grows in the level of competence and professionalism, with clear paths for learning and action since the beginner stages. Because software engineering is the most complex engineering that there is: it takes some 10 years to those who are really committed to start understanding what it is actually about, and some another 10 years of at least as much commitment to become real pros. -Julio
Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-03-10 07:46 -0400
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-03-10 07:14 -0700
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2025-03-10 16:42 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2025-06-18 02:51 -0400
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-28 11:37 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-28 13:50 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-28 15:16 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-28 17:59 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-28 22:18 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-29 10:18 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-29 12:16 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-07-29 17:37 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-29 18:24 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-29 19:14 +0200
Rust vs Hype (was Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust?) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-29 18:27 +0000
Re: Rust vs Hype (was Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-08-02 17:47 +0200
Re: Rust vs Hype (was Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust?) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-04 22:33 +0000
Re: Rust vs Hype (was Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-08-06 18:38 +0200
Re: Rust vs Hype (was Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust?) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-08 03:30 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-30 19:08 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-30 18:00 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-30 20:34 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-30 18:40 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-30 20:51 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-30 18:53 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-09-05 10:59 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-08-03 17:55 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-08-03 18:17 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-07-29 06:24 +0100
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-29 12:27 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-07-30 07:44 +0100
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-30 11:30 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-07-30 16:51 +0100
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-07-30 18:00 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-08-02 18:41 +0200
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2025-08-04 22:34 +0000
Re: Informal discussion: comp.lang.rust? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-03-10 17:35 -0400
csiph-web