Dear Reddit, Hacker News...(zedshaw.com)
zedshaw.com
Dear Reddit, Hacker News...
http://www.zedshaw.com/blog/2008-12-25.html
83 comments
And thanks for all the laughs Zed. We are looking forward to respectfully disagreeing with your upcoming intelligent thoughtful essays :-)
So did he drop the persona at the end of the post or at the beginning? Because he still sounded pretty damn stern and macho when he mentioned tearing down entire language communities with a single post; and I've been on the internet so long I've seen the "ha ha you actually BELIEVED all the outrageous stuff I said loudly and defended to my last breath? Oh, you poor, pathetic saps. You poor, poor, pathetic, pathetic, gullible saps" routine a million times.
To me, it seemed like he did mostly believe what he said in his rants. He is only backing away from the ZSFA persona, not the things he said during his ZSFA tenure. As someone who's done time as a troll, I can verify that the persona can get pretty constrictive, even if there is a core of truth in everything you type.
"Programmers will listen to people ... not because what they say is all that intelligent or thoughtful, but because they say it like a Man’s Man™."
Yep. We are primates. Purely logical communication is rare amongst us -- a speaker's body language, inflection, status, and arousal level all affect how we hear what they are saying.
People who do not respond in this way are considered weird; those who cannot, receive a diagnosis.
Yep. We are primates. Purely logical communication is rare amongst us -- a speaker's body language, inflection, status, and arousal level all affect how we hear what they are saying.
People who do not respond in this way are considered weird; those who cannot, receive a diagnosis.
Perhaps I am too far down the ladder of programmers, but was I the only one who didn't care about the recent teenage prom queen drama to engulf the Ruby community?
Good hacks continued to come out, the language was still fun to write in, and Rails and Merb continued to move forward.
Perhaps I don't follow enough on twitter, or something. I get the sense enough energy was wasted in the past year to power several nations.
Merry Christmas all, glad Zed is doing what he enjoys as always, we should all strive to live each day that way.
Good hacks continued to come out, the language was still fun to write in, and Rails and Merb continued to move forward.
Perhaps I don't follow enough on twitter, or something. I get the sense enough energy was wasted in the past year to power several nations.
Merry Christmas all, glad Zed is doing what he enjoys as always, we should all strive to live each day that way.
I feel the same way. Being an outsider, who cares about the bickering between coding groups. It's still a nice programming language to code in and improve on.
I can't bring myself to be uncharitable today, but I have to say I'll be very surprised if Zed stops writing rants. I am... very skeptical. I've seen this exact same drama played out on a dozen forums and community sites.
Just out of curiosity... Based on your comments, there seems to be something going on between you and Zed. Was there some incident?
Comment stalking makes Santa sad...
From the sound of it Zed isn't going to stop writing rants... he's going to stop existing!
I don't find that so hard to believe. Artificial personalities can get addictive, but spending time in Zed's head must get tedious fast.
I don't find that so hard to believe. Artificial personalities can get addictive, but spending time in Zed's head must get tedious fast.
On one hand, I don't like to let myself be flattered, especially when I have no idea how sincere the flattery is.
On the other: you like us? All right, c'mon, group hug.
On the other: you like us? All right, c'mon, group hug.
I don't understand why I'm meant to care about a troll promising to stop trolling.
A troll is someone who's just trying to get a reaction, but hasn't actually contributed anything worthwhile.
Zed has obviously contributed a lot, and was being trolled by the Ruby community (know what 'fuzed' stands for?) before he started ZSFA.
Zed has obviously contributed a lot, and was being trolled by the Ruby community (know what 'fuzed' stands for?) before he started ZSFA.
When you write long-form blog posts that are about little more than the list of Ruby people that have offended you --- often writing about them for the Nth time --- I stop caring what your contributions are, and start being annoyed. Whatever Zed's "contributions" are, there are 100 Ruby developers who have contributed more, but don't demand that I attend to their neuroses.
> Whatever Zed's "contributions" are, there are 100 Ruby developers who have contributed more
No, really, there aren't. Go read about Zed.
No, really, there aren't. Go read about Zed.
You're joking, right? Name 2 developers each for the Rubinius, JRuby, MRI/YARV, and IronRuby projects, 2 developers from Passenger, anyone working on the Nimble Methods blog, anyone working on EventMachine, any 2 developers working on Merb, any non-37s developer working on ActiveRecord, anyone working on Ruby-AST projects, anyone working on GitHub and anyone working on Ruby git bindings --- there, I'm at 20, and I haven't even gotten to _why yet.
Don't bullshit me. The fact that Zed talks the talk doesn't automatically mean he's walking the walk. He wrote a webserver. There are 100 Ruby developers who have written more --- and more important --- code than Zed, and I haven't heard about any of the crank calls they've gotten.
Don't bullshit me. The fact that Zed talks the talk doesn't automatically mean he's walking the walk. He wrote a webserver. There are 100 Ruby developers who have written more --- and more important --- code than Zed, and I haven't heard about any of the crank calls they've gotten.
Let me know when you get to one hundred. In the meantime, writing the Ruby webserver is a larger contribution than say, git bindings.
What's even more of importance about that web server(mongrel) was that there was no good web server that could reliably run Ruby/Rails apps at that time.
Yeah, and that's an important distinction, especially in cases like this.
You can be pissed off and rude and not be a troll. If you do, the people calling you out as a troll are often trolling themselves, albeit more benignly.
You can be pissed off and rude and not be a troll. If you do, the people calling you out as a troll are often trolling themselves, albeit more benignly.
I've stopped clicking the links to his posts because they're always things I can't determine why I should care about. Most of his posts that I find from here could have been written by a non-programmer, and if they were the people here would complain they were off-topic.
It's very Valleywagish actually.
It's very Valleywagish actually.
I follow HN in NetNewsWire and can't always tell that a link goes to Zed; if I could tell, I'd ignore them.
"What you have witnessed is a year long proof that programmers will usually
only listen to the man who seems toughest, not the one who’s most possibly
right."
I have noticed this throughout the years - there is a whole lot of testosterone around and it only gets worse. I like his mention of the OO book covers in the early days ;)
I have noticed this throughout the years - there is a whole lot of testosterone around and it only gets worse. I like his mention of the OO book covers in the early days ;)
Eh, I don't see that reddit is worse. For one, this article isn't at the top of the programming subreddit. The comments here are better though.
I knew as soon as this popped up in my feed reader that it would be the top link on HN because it's very flattering, not that there's anything wrong with that.
He has the contrast between Reddit and HN right.
There are a lot of smart people on reddit, dons, cgibbard, sigpfe and slava_pestov to name a few.
While you're correct, I think the commenting and voting tendencies of the overall site population tend to drown them out. Intelligent discussions on Reddit seem to have a higher chance of being derailed by e.g. people posting 4chan cliches for cheap laughs.
Of course, he's flattering us, and he got voted way up...
Of course, he's flattering us, and he got voted way up...
Yeah, we're kinda suckers too.
I still think this site has more signal-to-noise than any other social news site except Metafilter, which is a good sign. I can still look at the top stories each day and find perhaps 20-25 that're worth at least a look, and 10 or so that generate discussions that I'm interested in participating in.
I still think this site has more signal-to-noise than any other social news site except Metafilter, which is a good sign. I can still look at the top stories each day and find perhaps 20-25 that're worth at least a look, and 10 or so that generate discussions that I'm interested in participating in.
Metafilter has a $5 upfront signup fee and diligent moderators. I'm convinced that's ultimately the best way to keep out most trolling and other assorted malarkey.
I'm really happy about this. I heard about Zed because of one of his first rants, but after browsing around his site I found gems like http://www.zedshaw.com/essays/master_and_expert.html . I'm really looking forward to reading more.
Yeah, when I first started looking at zed's website (around the time mongrel became popular), I really enjoyed his essays.. At that time, even his rants were interesting (http://www.zedshaw.com/rants/programmer_stats.html).
So thanks Zed for going back to writing thoughtful essays :-)
So thanks Zed for going back to writing thoughtful essays :-)
Amusingly enough, a lot of Zed's blog posts never actually seem to be voted up on Reddit, and this one was posted and voted up here before it was on Reddit.
http://www.reddit.com/search?q=zedshaw&sort=new
http://www.reddit.com/search?q=zedshaw&sort=new
I actually liked the rants
Zed actually says intelligent stuff but in a very obnoxious way.
This makes him a "half-way Reddit". Because Reddit is a place where most posters say stupid stuff in a very obnoxious way.
So, in a way, he was made for the environment. Sorry to see him leave.
This makes him a "half-way Reddit". Because Reddit is a place where most posters say stupid stuff in a very obnoxious way.
So, in a way, he was made for the environment. Sorry to see him leave.
Stop giving this guy popularity! Merely breathing hot air and having a fiesty online "persona" should not make you newsworthy (although, sadly, it clearly does).
He had some good points a year ago. Now, not so much.
He had some good points a year ago. Now, not so much.
That was kind of the point of the post.
I, for one, look forward to reading about his exploits in the Python world.
He has done some very interesting work in recent days using Python (vellum, SoS ...).
Compared to all the drama that goes on in the Ruby (should I say Rails?) world, reading Python blogs on planetpython.org is a learning experience.
He has done some very interesting work in recent days using Python (vellum, SoS ...).
Compared to all the drama that goes on in the Ruby (should I say Rails?) world, reading Python blogs on planetpython.org is a learning experience.
Who is this person and why do I care?
About section:
http://www.zedshaw.com/
I don't know you well enough to answer the second part of the question.
http://www.zedshaw.com/
I don't know you well enough to answer the second part of the question.
Ah, one of those Ruby "ninjas" who think they're God's gift because they made a website. Say no more.
Well...he did write Mongrel...so he's a bit of a "ninja."
I pretty much hate Ruby as much as any man can, but Zed has proven himself quite smart and capable, beyond "making a website".
Why, out of curiosity, do you hate it? You usually make pretty well-thought-out points, and I'm curious to hear the view of an anti-Rubyite. I just started playing with it and I'm liking it a lot.
Well, I have a tendency to be naturally adverse to anything that is incredibly hyped, so that should frame it. However, I have many complaints with the language itself and things surrounding it, so here I go, in no particular order:
- I don't like the overall community. That is not to say I do not like Ruby hackers, period -- a number of my friends fall into the category. However, I do not like the general holier-than-thou attitude that much of the community takes and the fact that they seem to spend more time talking about how fucking awesome Ruby is than they spend actually writing code. In many ways the community is young and I believe it has a lot of maturing to do. Once again, this obviously does not apply to everyone, but one of the most important attributes of a programming language (at least to me) is its community on the whole.
- I don't give a damn how "cool" a language is and this seems to be not only a general argument for it, but also a method by which many tutorials and other literature explain or introduce the language.
- I am of the opinion that Ruby is far more ad-hoc than it is elegant, and I think many are simply confusing the two. Sometimes you need (), sometimes you don't. Some people think the lack of "unnecessary" parenthesis makes the language more elegant, I just say it makes it harder to determine if something is an attribute or a method, for example. I don't believe there should be 50 different ways to do the same thing; there should be a couple different ways and one of them should almost always be considered "the best".
- What's intuitive for one person may not be so for another; it's not a universal thing and as such I do not find the language as intuitive as hyped. For instance, I find the following completely unintuitive:
- Despite all the Ruby community hand-waving about how "Ruby can't scale is a myth" and so forth, the fact remains that it is a (relatively speaking) young language which has many significant shortcomings -- shortcomings that even its own creator acknowledges. Except, many try to ignore these when they shouldn't.
Do I think Ruby has nothing going for it? No. Do I think it has no hope of improving and growing? No. I do, however, believe that it has a lot of growing, improving, and maturing to do before it is even half as godlike as so many feel it is (or just feel they need to say it is). That being said, I don't think I will ever use Ruby -- for these and other reasons (this is already too long). I imagine I will at least be civil towards it... eventually ;)
- I don't like the overall community. That is not to say I do not like Ruby hackers, period -- a number of my friends fall into the category. However, I do not like the general holier-than-thou attitude that much of the community takes and the fact that they seem to spend more time talking about how fucking awesome Ruby is than they spend actually writing code. In many ways the community is young and I believe it has a lot of maturing to do. Once again, this obviously does not apply to everyone, but one of the most important attributes of a programming language (at least to me) is its community on the whole.
- I don't give a damn how "cool" a language is and this seems to be not only a general argument for it, but also a method by which many tutorials and other literature explain or introduce the language.
- I am of the opinion that Ruby is far more ad-hoc than it is elegant, and I think many are simply confusing the two. Sometimes you need (), sometimes you don't. Some people think the lack of "unnecessary" parenthesis makes the language more elegant, I just say it makes it harder to determine if something is an attribute or a method, for example. I don't believe there should be 50 different ways to do the same thing; there should be a couple different ways and one of them should almost always be considered "the best".
- What's intuitive for one person may not be so for another; it's not a universal thing and as such I do not find the language as intuitive as hyped. For instance, I find the following completely unintuitive:
['list',...]. each { |food| print( food.capitalize ) }
for food in [...]: print food.capitalize()
- Despite all the Ruby community hand-waving about how "Ruby can't scale is a myth" and so forth, the fact remains that it is a (relatively speaking) young language which has many significant shortcomings -- shortcomings that even its own creator acknowledges. Except, many try to ignore these when they shouldn't.
Do I think Ruby has nothing going for it? No. Do I think it has no hope of improving and growing? No. I do, however, believe that it has a lot of growing, improving, and maturing to do before it is even half as godlike as so many feel it is (or just feel they need to say it is). That being said, I don't think I will ever use Ruby -- for these and other reasons (this is already too long). I imagine I will at least be civil towards it... eventually ;)
However, I do not like the general holier-than-thou attitude that much of the community takes and the fact that they seem to spend more time talking about how fucking awesome Ruby is than they spend actually writing code.
This is exactly the position taken on both sides of religious language wars. Don't consider yourself above the fray unless you can get over these emotions.
Because it looks nothing like a standard for loop.
I'm reading: "Because [language feature in A] doesn't look like [language feature in B]." This argument is frequently made by Blub programmers. I can say that I find the first way more intuitive simply because it matches all the other kinds of iterator functions in Ruby. Will you accuse me of immature fanboyism?
There are stupid fanboys and uninformed wannabes in the young Ruby community. Try not to let them influence you as much as they are now. If you want to divide programmers up like that, then try to imagine someone similarly minded on the Ruby side. What they might see in you is a Python guy on a mission against Rubyists. There is plenty of room to interpret your comments as a manifestation of a "holier-than-thou" attitude.
I can come up with just as many silly reasons to hate Python with all of my heart and soul. There have been plenty of times when I have programmed in Python and have stumbled across something I can rant about. So what? I can go rant about it, and then someone will rant back at me, and pretty soon we're having an idiot contest.
Ruby and Python are both stupid, over-hyped, and totally awesome. Their communities are both full of morons, trolls, anti-{Ruby|Python}ists, and really smart and nice people.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't argue about languages. I like to argue about languages. I'm saying that "that doesn't look like a for-loop!" and "I hate Perlisms!" are vacuous, and I'm also saying that being anti-fanboy is no better than being a fanboy.
Think independently and make your own conclusions that are uninfluenced by all the people on the Internet that are wrong.
This is exactly the position taken on both sides of religious language wars. Don't consider yourself above the fray unless you can get over these emotions.
Because it looks nothing like a standard for loop.
I'm reading: "Because [language feature in A] doesn't look like [language feature in B]." This argument is frequently made by Blub programmers. I can say that I find the first way more intuitive simply because it matches all the other kinds of iterator functions in Ruby. Will you accuse me of immature fanboyism?
There are stupid fanboys and uninformed wannabes in the young Ruby community. Try not to let them influence you as much as they are now. If you want to divide programmers up like that, then try to imagine someone similarly minded on the Ruby side. What they might see in you is a Python guy on a mission against Rubyists. There is plenty of room to interpret your comments as a manifestation of a "holier-than-thou" attitude.
I can come up with just as many silly reasons to hate Python with all of my heart and soul. There have been plenty of times when I have programmed in Python and have stumbled across something I can rant about. So what? I can go rant about it, and then someone will rant back at me, and pretty soon we're having an idiot contest.
Ruby and Python are both stupid, over-hyped, and totally awesome. Their communities are both full of morons, trolls, anti-{Ruby|Python}ists, and really smart and nice people.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't argue about languages. I like to argue about languages. I'm saying that "that doesn't look like a for-loop!" and "I hate Perlisms!" are vacuous, and I'm also saying that being anti-fanboy is no better than being a fanboy.
Think independently and make your own conclusions that are uninfluenced by all the people on the Internet that are wrong.
"Because [language feature in A] doesn't look like [language feature in B]."
Well, obviously. It's not like I'm arguing that Ruby's syntax is for The Gays because it differs from Python's. I find nothing fundamentally wrong with it, other than the fact that it is not intuitive to me, having seen hundreds of incantations of the for loop. An oft-touted "feature" of Ruby is that it is intuitive; I find it to not be intuitive. This is entirely my opinion.
In the end, a large portion of one's opinion of a language is based off of personal preference. There are undeniable, factual problems with Ruby in terms of performance, community maturity, complexity, language features, etc. There are even more opinion-based, subjective reasons why I feel it is a poor language choice. I make no attempts to justify these reasons beyond making it clear that they are merely my opinions. And I was quite clear on that.
If you can come up with as many silly reasons (some of my reasons aren't silly by any definition, but I digress) to hate Python, then go right ahead. I certainly don't care. I wasn't ranting about it to try to convince anybody of anything; why I like a language isn't important enough to make a soap box out of it. I was asked a question, I answered that question. That's all.
Well, obviously. It's not like I'm arguing that Ruby's syntax is for The Gays because it differs from Python's. I find nothing fundamentally wrong with it, other than the fact that it is not intuitive to me, having seen hundreds of incantations of the for loop. An oft-touted "feature" of Ruby is that it is intuitive; I find it to not be intuitive. This is entirely my opinion.
In the end, a large portion of one's opinion of a language is based off of personal preference. There are undeniable, factual problems with Ruby in terms of performance, community maturity, complexity, language features, etc. There are even more opinion-based, subjective reasons why I feel it is a poor language choice. I make no attempts to justify these reasons beyond making it clear that they are merely my opinions. And I was quite clear on that.
If you can come up with as many silly reasons (some of my reasons aren't silly by any definition, but I digress) to hate Python, then go right ahead. I certainly don't care. I wasn't ranting about it to try to convince anybody of anything; why I like a language isn't important enough to make a soap box out of it. I was asked a question, I answered that question. That's all.
The biggest difference is that tdavis isn't a python zealot. Instead of talking about how awesome python is all the time, he's showing how awesome it is by coding with it.
He didn't force a rant to spark endless political-like debate. Someone politely asked his opinion, which is by definition filled with his own preferences & biases, and he politely gave it.
He didn't force a rant to spark endless political-like debate. Someone politely asked his opinion, which is by definition filled with his own preferences & biases, and he politely gave it.
Not that I'm a big Ruby fan or anything, and I do agree with some of what you said, but... what does or doesn't look like a loop depends entirely upon what you're accustomed to. Pythons loop syntax isn't objectively better (I realize you said to you); however, don't think something else can't feel just as natural after a little experience with it.
There are advantages to the Ruby version as well, the Python version uses special syntax; a control structure one must memorize the semantics of. Semantics which are slightly different for different control structures in the language like knowing boolean expressions in if statements short circuit their evaluation, or the body of a loop is evaluated once for each iteration of the loop.
The Ruby version, copied from Smalltalk, is using a more general technique of building control structures in the library rather than as special syntax all built upon passing lambda/anonymous functions/blocks, whatever you like to call them, around to higher order functions like each. The benefit being you can see the delayed evaluation and build custom control structures in your own libraries without the need to memorize new semantics that aren't visible in the code as with procedural keyword control structures like if/when/do/while/switch, etc.
Admittedly, I think Ruby's version is a bit ugly, I'm a Smalltalker and find this much better...
Lispers feel the same about their macros. To a Ruby programmer, each screams loop just as loudly as for to you, or do to a Smalltalker.
There are advantages to the Ruby version as well, the Python version uses special syntax; a control structure one must memorize the semantics of. Semantics which are slightly different for different control structures in the language like knowing boolean expressions in if statements short circuit their evaluation, or the body of a loop is evaluated once for each iteration of the loop.
The Ruby version, copied from Smalltalk, is using a more general technique of building control structures in the library rather than as special syntax all built upon passing lambda/anonymous functions/blocks, whatever you like to call them, around to higher order functions like each. The benefit being you can see the delayed evaluation and build custom control structures in your own libraries without the need to memorize new semantics that aren't visible in the code as with procedural keyword control structures like if/when/do/while/switch, etc.
Admittedly, I think Ruby's version is a bit ugly, I'm a Smalltalker and find this much better...
{'list'} do: [:food | food capitalized print ]
Lispers feel the same about their macros. To a Ruby programmer, each screams loop just as loudly as for to you, or do to a Smalltalker.
From your explanation, I would then imagine that were I a long-time Smalltalk/Lisp user I would decry Python for its silly keywords.
As you noticed, I tried to make it obvious that some of my reasons were in no way objective.
As you noticed, I tried to make it obvious that some of my reasons were in no way objective.
I know you did, and I acknowledged that, I was just trying to point out to you that you have the ability to change those emotional reactions; they aren't set in stone or based on logic.
Very true, and if this were a case of me disliking a fundamentally better language due to foreign syntax I would change that. However, after doing a lot of reading and experimenting with Ruby, I can't really find anything fundamentally better about it.
There isn't, frankly I find it a very ad hoc messy language myself. I just wanted to point out that lambdas and higher order functions are one the cool things about it, even though they do it wrong and have 3 different ways to create blocks.
Smalltalk does it right, blocks are real objects and have only one syntax for creating them and don't require being passed as the last arg to use the sweet syntax.
Smalltalk does it right, blocks are real objects and have only one syntax for creating them and don't require being passed as the last arg to use the sweet syntax.
As gnaritas pointed out, what you're running up against in that unfamiliar loop is a Smalltalk idiom that Ruby imported. My first reaction to this was, well, it's only unfamiliar, and what you call the "standard for loop" is merely a sample bias. On second thought, though, I think your original point stands. You can't just import idioms from wherever, put them all together, and shake. Or rather, you can, but what you end up with is "far more ad hoc than elegant".
What Smalltalk has that Ruby doesn't have is a simple, regular structure at its core that everything else is defined in terms of. Although it may not seem like it, that's far more than an academic point. It has enormous consequences for the programs you can write - for the programs you can think of. Most of the computing world has yet to catch up with this insight.
In the meantime, we get kitchen-sink languages that are good enough for the classes of programs that we already know how to write and are looking to make incrementally easier. I'm tempted to compare Ruby to PL/I. But that's unfair since Ruby at least was invented by a programmer who wanted to make a language he would enjoy.
What Smalltalk has that Ruby doesn't have is a simple, regular structure at its core that everything else is defined in terms of. Although it may not seem like it, that's far more than an academic point. It has enormous consequences for the programs you can write - for the programs you can think of. Most of the computing world has yet to catch up with this insight.
In the meantime, we get kitchen-sink languages that are good enough for the classes of programs that we already know how to write and are looking to make incrementally easier. I'm tempted to compare Ruby to PL/I. But that's unfair since Ruby at least was invented by a programmer who wanted to make a language he would enjoy.
Sometimes you need (), sometimes you don't. Some people
think the lack of "unnecessary" parenthesis makes the
language more elegant, I just say it makes it harder to
determine if something is an attribute or a method, for
example.
Very well written constructive criticism. You have brilliantly summarized the issues with ruby (and its community).
And i really liked the point about the language being not intuitive for everyone. Not many say it as it goes against the core 'cool' feature of ruby, but it's far more easier to crank up a good amount of messy code with this language, if one is not careful enough.
And i really liked the point about the language being not intuitive for everyone. Not many say it as it goes against the core 'cool' feature of ruby, but it's far more easier to crank up a good amount of messy code with this language, if one is not careful enough.
The 'for i in list' syntax exists in Ruby if you want to just loop over a list. The block syntax though gives you the flexibility to use map/collect, select, reject, or inject instead of plain each over the list to give you some functional advantages.
Exactly. It's not that Ruby lacks the ability to do some things, but rather, has its own additional idiomatic way of accomplishing the same task.
Zed, i wish you the best of luck, and hope you find new and creative ways to wreak havoc on the internet!
At least he had enough sense to give up the gimmick before it got old
I truly hope that Zed has some "just fucking do it" left in him after the slaps in the face he's taken from some of the Ruby/Rails community. If he makes good on his plans, stops talking about himself, and lets his actions and intelligence speak for themselves, I'll gain a world of respect for him.
Oh, and Zed: "Any more" is written "any more" when referring to additional items. "I will not write rants anymore" would be grammatically correct, however. Just a bit of constructive criticism. :)
Oh, and Zed: "Any more" is written "any more" when referring to additional items. "I will not write rants anymore" would be grammatically correct, however. Just a bit of constructive criticism. :)
Base flattery works.
Troll and Man’s Man™ are different beasts. But trolling works too.
I doubt that C++ or Lisp's success has anything to do with stern looks.
Troll and Man’s Man™ are different beasts. But trolling works too.
I doubt that C++ or Lisp's success has anything to do with stern looks.
Are C++ and Lisp successful?
C++ doesn't seem so popular in the last decade. Lisp was That Language That Abuse Was Written In to a lot of people.
C++ doesn't seem so popular in the last decade. Lisp was That Language That Abuse Was Written In to a lot of people.
C++ certainly was popular, in fact the most popular by every measurement I saw back in the day. And he's talking about how it got there when it did, not today. I don't necessarily agree, but what he was saying should have been pretty obvious. :)
Both C++ and Lisp are successful. Of cause It depends on how you define a "success" among thousands of programming languages.
[deleted]
Does this mean his site will change to something less contrary than white on black?
And the letter to Reddit, Dear Reddit is his last blog rant :)
Best luck, Zed.
Zed is such a douche.
"Zed's dead baby, Zed's dead."