Robby Findler <ro...@cs.northwestern.edu> writes: > Of course, it is good to make it easy to move to new versions of the > language, but if there is no real benefit to the transition for the > programmer (eg they aren't planning to touch that code for the next N > months anyway as it does its job well) then I think we should let them > leave it alone and come to it when they need to.
I very much agree with that point of view! Programmers come in so many varieties these days that it's hard to make generally valid statements about them. Apple's approach has worked well for them indeed, but that's in the context of commercial application development for a dominantly technophile user base. Different contexts (open source, educational, in-house software, ...) and different user categories (banks, lawyers, scientists, ...) require different approaches. On the other hand, I am not sure that it is possible for a development environment to stay completely neutral on the issue of mandatory change and please everyone. But I'd love to be proven wrong about this. For an in-depth analysis of this question in the specific context of scientific computing, see https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02117588 Konrad. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/m1k1aw33pg.fsf%40ordinateur-de-catherine--konrad.home.