What are the most polarizing programming languages?
varianceexplained.org
varianceexplained.org
"I’ve been a lifelong Mac and UNIX user, and nearly all of my programming in college and graduate school was centered around Python and R. But I was happy to join a company with a .NET stack, and I’m glad I did- because I loved the team, the product, and the data. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I’m glad I defined myself in terms of what work I wanted to do, and not something I wanted to avoid."
A very good principle.
And it doesn't surprise me that Haskell users dislike thing. Once you use a superior language, you really realize how much things suck. People warn about this in jest: don't learn <fp lang> because you'll hate working in other languages. But it's quite real and true. After being in a high level language with a good type system, working in a "mainstream" language is like trying to explain stuff to a subpar 6-yr-old. It's just incredibly frustrating.
(Working with one customer that chose C for their large codebase due to performance... Except the incredible verbosity ended up hiding terrible algorithms, and the lack of abstraction means changing things is a huge undertaking. Or on C# projects, every 5 lines of code I write I realise how it'd only be one in F#. Or how a long-standing bug would not have been possible due to more sane compiler checks.)
XML's fatal mistake was requiring the name in the closing tag. Had they just used <> or </ or </> people wouldn't mind as much. Also ask the stupid external entity, DTD, and association with "enterprise" terrible designs. But JSON will get there over time. Already people are pushing the equivalent of XSD and WSDL because they are useful.
I know it's not really a solid principle, but I think it's funny regardless.
That fit well with the results. Windows is disliked by Unix people because it is something we're often forced to use by the business. (By contrast Windows developers are rarely forced to use Unix.) Older technologies are more disliked because developers are more likely to have had to support legacy products using those technologies.
But I would have missed the "enterprise technologies suck" issue if I hadn't read the article.
Pike vs Stroustrup
But I'll be gracious enough to give Linus the final word :
I will, in fact, claim that the difference between a bad programmer and a good one is whether he considers his code or his data structures more important. Bad programmers worry about the code. Good programmers worry about data structures and their relationships.
— Linus Torvalds > Pike
Analyzing the main Stack Overflow site would be more useful. You go to Stack Overflow when something doesn't work.
Why would they do that?
An annoying email client, to be sure.
But the Domino project was a fork of Apache, with support of server-side JavaScript (as well as VB-Script variant) talking to an HTML based templating system. This allied to an embedded NoSQL database engine that's the ancestor of CouchBase, with a granular ACL system of authentication based on RSA keys.
So, totally uncool then. :-)
My guess is that if you like HTML, you will mark yourself as liking both HTML and HTML5. However, it would be odd to like one and not the other, and pointless to dislike them both.
In that case, it might be more correct to count people who liked/disliked at least one of HTML or HTML5 as being HTML-positive/negative people, but I am not sure that this won't distort the data in some other way.
I have a neutral stance on jQuery. I love some parts of the library like its Sizzle engine and the extended selectors it provides out of the box and on the other hand, there are parts that I dislike like animation (very quirky to my taste) but I can't really feel any disdain or negative emotions toward it because I am still well versed in JS/DOM API and I can really accomplish a lot of stuff in the absence of jQuery.
So, this animosity toward jQuery is but unfathomable to me.
I've inherited jQuery and Angular codebases on freelance jobs in recent years, and I can say for certain that I'd much rather inherit an Angular project than a jQuery one. You have a fighting chance that the logic will be segregated into the components you would expect, rather than spaghetti markup/js mashups with bits of event handling logic blurted all over the place. That is of course the worst case scenario for a bad jQuery project, but it's often the reality when you step into a messy codebase where a procession of people have hacked around for a short while and then departed. I'm thinking in particular of a situation when a crappy, derelict jQuery plugin had been chucked into the project a while previously, and was triggering "stop script" prompts in certain versions of IE. Fun to debug.
It's a framework/library thing. Angular is opinionated, but that's worked in my favour to date.
For example, I personally see the power in git, but find it a pain in the arse to use other than for basic stuff. CVS was far simpler, and I never had much trouble with that back in the day. But git is pretty much the standard version control these days, and it doesn't make much sense to use the others.
Thank god, we convinced our bosses to rewrite our legacy systems in elixir, since ~10years of iterative php progress grinded to a halt with lasagna layers of spaghetti code of homegrown-everything. Unmaintainable now, but the feature request keep coming in, and will do for years to come.
"What do you mean it's not real object oriented programming? PHP5 has been out for TEN YEARS."
I've written daemons, GUI programs (!) and even stuff like custom binary network protocols in PHP, in a fraction of the time it'd have needed in C/C++...
Neither Java, Ruby, Python nor anything else are as simple to setup and resource-friendly to run as a PHP-FCGI+nginx setup.