Exactly my point. Philosophy has its place in software engineering but often it's not on a pedestal.
Philosophy has its place in software engineering but often it's not on a pedestal.
That's a philosophy in itself, as is pragmatism or adherence to science. You just happen to disagree with theirs.
My point is, suckless products can actually suck despite following their "philosophy." It's not only the UI, although strictly adhering to the "UNIX" philosophy has its flaws. No, it's the suckiness of the source code that I'm talking about, e.g. dwm is composed of ad-hoc internal abstractions and special cases based on arcane X11 WM domain knowledge, not to mention the suckless comment "philosophy": that comments are a sign of bad code therefore don't use them.
Their "philosophy" is narrow-minded and overly simplistic, like a religion. It's also not based in truth, just biased anecdotes, e.g.
"Most hackers actually don’t care much about code quality."
...What? Is there a source for this information?
Their "philosophy" only makes sense for the smallest toy programs. Notice how there is no suckless kernel, It would likely be a heaping pile. Dogma loses, science wins.
Nope, all ideas are philosophy. Just as all matter is made up of atoms. You can't escape philosophy no matter how hard you try.