Szorc: Mercurial's Journey to and Reflections on Python 3

Posted Jan 16, 2020 7:36 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642)
In reply to: Szorc: Mercurial's Journey to and Reflections on Python 3 by dvdeug
Parent article: Szorc: Mercurial's Journey to and Reflections on Python 3

> If your program doesn't do something people need, then the onus is generally on its creators and promoters to fix that.

*IF* the creators or promoters care about this particular set people. Maybe they don't? Try to imagine. It could be for any reason, good or bad. Logical or not.

> If my new compiler only targets ARM64, I don't get to complain at all the people who who aren't rushing to retarget it to x86-64 yet consider that a missing feature.

I don't remember reading so many ungrounded assumptions packed in such a small piece of text. Pure rhetoric, it's surreal. I spent an ordinate amount of time trying (and failing) to relate it to something real.

BTW: you keep misunderstanding that roc favors the reality that he merely tries to _describe_.

Szorc: Mercurial's Journey to and Reflections on Python 3

Posted Jan 17, 2020 8:09 UTC (Fri) by dvdeug (guest, #10998) [Link]

>> If your program doesn't do something people need, then the onus is generally on its creators and promoters to fix that.

> *IF* the creators or promoters care about this particular set people.

Rust promoters do care about this particular set of people, or else we wouldn't be having this discussion. Rust promoters are right here complaining that these users don't support the use of Rust because it would hurt portability to their systems. They're not saying "if Debian chooses to reject Rust in core packages over this, that's cool with me." They're telling people they're wrong for finding this particular feature important.

> I don't remember reading so many ungrounded assumptions packed in such a small piece of text.

And yet you don't name one. Implement the features people want or not, but don't get offended that they use alternatives if you don't.

> you keep misunderstanding that roc favors the reality that he merely tries to _describe_.

Roc:
>> I don't know why gcc play along; I suspect it's inertia and a misguided sense of duty.
>> I have more sympathy for potentially relevant new embedded architectures

When you start describing something as "misguided" and saying "I have more sympathy for", you're not neutrally describing reality.