Why don't you make an actual argument instead of ignoring what I wrote and countering with opinion based snark?
Edit: While it might seem confrontational, it's a serious question. This very short discussion is a great example how it's not a meritocracy at all. You get to make whatever insulting opinion you want without backing it up and if someone even slightly dare to talk back it's downvoted. Because people agree with you opinions even though they can't really state why.
The experience of a few people, which you haven't even stated but just used their names for your own cause, doesn't really talk to that of the majority of people. Nor does it explain how the culture of those creating a language wouldn't go into it. This is exactly the problem with opinion based discussion, you never have to answer anyone. So if your believe in merit in any way just answer the original question.
How does the experience of these people make it far fetched that compilers reflect the culture people making or using them?
It's a straight forward question and you've already stated that you hold this opinion, so it shouldn't be hard to give an answer to it.
> Your opponents simply deny that the compiler has the ability to exclude or be sexist or racist. The argument that the compiler or test suite discriminates on anything but merit is for you to make. Good luck.
That's not really how enlightened discussions work. If you have the opinion that the "compiler doesn't care" and that it's somehow related diversity you have to make an argument to the fact. You can't just say that "it doesn't care" and have it be your opponents job to make an argument that disproves your opinion. At least not if your expect to base your opinions on merit.
The notion that compiler reflect the background and culture of those creating and using it isn't exactly far fetched. Of course something like a hobbyist background (historically only available to certain groups of people) is far more important in certain types of language and that the demographics of people differ between languages.
But that not even the point. What you value in the code you're writing is as much, if not more of a factor, in projects. So it doesn't necessarily matter if the compiler is unbiased since what's good code is going to be judged by people.
Edit: While it might seem confrontational, it's a serious question. This very short discussion is a great example how it's not a meritocracy at all. You get to make whatever insulting opinion you want without backing it up and if someone even slightly dare to talk back it's downvoted. Because people agree with you opinions even though they can't really state why.
The experience of a few people, which you haven't even stated but just used their names for your own cause, doesn't really talk to that of the majority of people. Nor does it explain how the culture of those creating a language wouldn't go into it. This is exactly the problem with opinion based discussion, you never have to answer anyone. So if your believe in merit in any way just answer the original question.
How does the experience of these people make it far fetched that compilers reflect the culture people making or using them?
It's a straight forward question and you've already stated that you hold this opinion, so it shouldn't be hard to give an answer to it.