On Monday, 21 January 2013 at 09:48:46 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Monday, 21 January 2013 at 08:55:00 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Monday, 21 January 2013 at 07:20:59 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, January 21, 2013 02:01:42 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
D does continue to face an uphill battle for mindshare:
These days,
most people who write code prefer to use languages that
accept ANY
grammatically-correct code and deliberately remain silent
about all
mechanically-checkable problems they can possibly ignore.
Apparently
this is because they prefer to manually write extra
unittests so that
only a subset of these errors are actually guaranteed to get
caught
(if there's any guarantee at all).
In my experience, most programmers don't want to write unit
tests, so I
suspect that the folks who are pushing for less strict
languages generally
aren't testing their code any better than the folks using
strict languages
are. I suspect that the main problem with folks wanting the
compiler to just
accept stuff is that too many of those folks started with
scripting languages
where you don't have compilation errors, because you don't
compile anything.
- Jonathan M Davis
We move from ruby on rail to Node.js for scalability reasons
!!!!!!
I always laugh when I read such things.
Back in 1999, I was doing web development in our own TCL Apache
module, with a developed in-house framework (C/TCL), which was
quite similar to Rails 1.0.
Around 2002, we started to migrate to C++/.NET (at the time
only available to Microsoft partner companies like ours),
because of scalability issues.
What this taught us is that if you want to really scale, only
compiled languages will do a proper job.
Yet people seem not to learn from history.
So I tested tweeting that with a #facepalm hashtag. I got some
ruby on rail people following me now. That makes me really sad.
