[flagged]
I assume you're posing a rhetorical question (implying that no languages are better or worse in this regard) rather than saying you actually want a language that's intentionally unfriendly to queer people. In that case:
The relevant part in the article is quoting someone saying that because the Rust community adopted a code of conduct prohibiting harassment and took the attitude that no question is stupid it attracted more queer and trans coders and n00bs. Are you saying that you don't think it's possible that this type of code of conduct can make a forum more friendly? It doesn't seem that unreasonable (or some sort of outrage of wokeness run amock) to think that queer/trans coders are going to prefer a language where they know the community isn't going to harass them.
>It doesn't seem that unreasonable .. to think that queer/trans coders are going to prefer a language where they know the community isn't going to harass them.
Or are BLTQPRs like vegans, in that respect?
personal identity > mental capabilities
personal branding > collective growth
physical traits > work ethics
so it's funny to me that they are still called "communities" but everyone has its own strong individual identity and you have to respect it (meaning you need to aknowledge it) while talking about something completely different.
It's like going to the gas station and instead of asking "how much" for the gas you start a conversation like "I am bald. Do you like bald people? Is this gas station aware of bald people existence? Do you recognize us as people? Do you stand by our side or not?" review "Did not speak my language. Not bald. Probably racist. Won't come again."
Anyway:
HCL is the fastest growing language on GitHub, faster than Rust and TypeScript
What languages should they steer away from?
In my experience, it's less that there's specific languages to avoid, and more that there's a general baseline of unpleasantness on the internet towards those folk. As a result, they tend to steer towards the islands where that doesn't occur.
There isn't a list of "These are the problem languages", it's an experience of "Oh, this community has a CoC that protects me and has a culture I'm OK with".
I am capable of making assumptions by myself, I fail to see how these assumptions are relevant in the real World, where I never observed them except for single cases that are everywhere and happen more or less with the same frequency.
I can't take an hypothetical as something that should convince me to use Rust because "some other community is worse in my fictional story"
I can say from my personal life that I have avoided or actively gone to stores based on similar perceptions, and tend to analyze the same information whenever joining a new online community.
"This thread came as my response to this post by CppCon. Nothing has changed. They invited a person convicted of possession of Child Sexual Abuse Imagery to a conference with a child care program. Where people are encouraged to bring their children. https://cppcon.org/2022dipost/"
(note that this is a much higher bar than any mere "cancellation", the person in question has a criminal conviction)
There is a direct line between fostering an environment that is open to all sorts of marginalized groups, the people joining that environment being more inclined to help out with the core project, and the core project successfully growing a large user base.
At most people seem to be offended by the community code of conduct that sort of lays out the golden rule with some added verbage for the thick skulls out there?
Even if it was a big rainbow flag at rust-lang.org, who the hell cares? The language is fantastic and solves real problems.
The article actually does touch on it, but it's very easy to miss since it's just mentioned in passing as one example in a small section noting ways in which the language tried to be build "a culture that was known for being unusually friendly and open to newcomers," which kind of makes it even weirder that someone would be so triggered that they would need to post a whole rant about it and dismiss the entire article as "obligatory LGBTQ nonsense":
> Along the way, the Rust community was also building a culture that was known for being unusually friendly and open to newcomers. “No one ever calls you a noob,” says Nell Shamrell-Harrington, a principal engineer at Microsoft who at the time worked on Rust at Mozilla. “No question is considered a stupid question.”
> Part of this, she says, is that Hoare had very early on posted a “code of conduct,” prohibiting harassment, that anyone contributing to Rust was expected to adhere to. The community embraced it, and that, longtime Rust community members say, drew queer and trans coders to get involved in Rust in higher proportions than you’d find with other languages. Even the error messages that the compiler creates when the coder makes a mistake are unusually solicitous; they describe the error, and also politely suggest how to fix it.
> “The C and C++ compiler[s], when I make mistakes, make me feel like a terrible person,” Shamrell-Harrington says with a laugh. “The Rust compiler is more like it’s guiding you to write super-safe code.”
And I would expect that women and persons LGBTQ, having a vastly higher chance of having been exposed to sexual predation, would be much more wary of this and pick up on such red flags much faster. Thus, understandably staying away from the language and being drawn to a more inclusive community like that of Rust.
For a summary: https://twitter.com/pati_gallardo/status/1561093445489401857...
[1] https://www.infoworld.com/article/3665128/rust-is-most-popul...
I would say that it risks alienating people who are tired of finding politics injected into every corner of their life. And when you have to spell out carefully how inclusive you are, be sure you actually include everyone. That list gets pretty long.
If you look at any one trait, you might be able to pick the "normal" variation of that trait by its frequency and yeah, in that case it would not be rare.
But when you combine traits, the probabilities multiply and that quickly reduces your probability of being "normal" with regard to all traits. For example, if two independent variable "normal" traits have a 2/3 probability, for example, the probability of being normal with regards to both traits is 4/9--already below 50%.
I'm aware of how you're defining it, I just don't care.
Don't bother with whatever appeal to authority you're about to search for: I don't care what the dictionary says, either. Dictionaries describe how people use words, and sometimes the way people use words changes faster than the dictionary can keep up. People using words are the source of information in the dictionary, and viewing the dictionary as an authority on meaning is a fundamental misunderstanding of how dictionaries work.
> Normalness is not defined mathematically, and doesn't mean the intersection of an infinite number of arbitrarily selected traits.
Normalness is defined by the common understanding of the people who use the word to communicate. Usage determines definition, not the other way around.
If you understood what the person meant enough to know they're using a word in a way that you aren't used to, then communication occurred.
If you really want to fight about this particular dictionary definition not being mathematical, you should really look up the history of the word, because you're very wrong about that. But that's rather silly, because usage determines what the definition is, not the other way around.
> The meaning is clear to anyone who speaks plain English.
True! Which is why it's bizarre that you would insist on a different meaning when everyone, including you, understands what is being said.
If you just want to have an argument with someone, why don't you start an argument with someone who isn't trying to represent the underrepresented?
> Nobody defines normal as meaning specifically male, women are the majority of the population.
Not explicitly, but there are a lot of cases where female interests are treated as deviations from the norm.
I thought you said "normalness isn't defined mathematically". Which is it: do we define normal based on numbers (i.e. the majority) or not? Or does the defintion of normal just shift in whatever way is convenient for you to pretend your viewpoint is the majority viewpoint?
that's what everybody consider normal as in "it's the most typical and probable situation"
queer people are the 0.1% globally
There isn't. I find that any organizations priding itself in employing (X) group of people is being disingenious at best, and preferential at worst.
Personal traits are irrelevant in a professional setting, let alone an online one where they are hidden away behind written communication. So to actively seek them out, or worse, place them on a pedestal, only signals that you reward personal traits over actual work ethic and ability. You're essentially taking pride in what your employees are rather than what your employees can do... Such organizations tend to go down a purity spiral of policing human interaction and speech, as well as preferential treatment of employees, to the detriment of product quality. Often implementing measures that are low in merit but high in potential for abuse, such as forcing contributors to sign vague agreements[1], or banning "offensive" numbers[2] from being used.
I wouldn't trust such an organization with my machine or data. The comments in the article do nothing but instill doubt in Rust's quality as a product and its future.
[1] https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/code-of-conduct
[2] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/d0ea1d767925d53b2230e...
2. That does not ban any numbers from being used. That is a lint in the compiler's codebase where they do not wish to have those being used in examples. only the compiler.
what's wrong with 0xB00B135 ?
and why 0xCAFED00D? if this is a reference to something I don't get it and probably it shouldn't be there if it's not so popular that anybody knows about it.
the best I could find about it is "("cafe dude") is used by Java as a magic number for their pack200 compression."
Am I missing something here?
Why a compiler cares about this stuff?
err("Don't use magic numbers that spell things (consider 0x12345678)");How about some magic words spell things and you can't change that?
Java classes start with 0xCAFEBABE whether we like it or not.
Do
0xF1CA
0xF355A
0xFA770
But sure: I don't know Italian slang. However, a project that conducts both itself and its examples in English not being comprehensive about possible meanings in other languages isn't exactly a gotcha. Furthermore, the example is suggesting that you don't pick at random, but instead something that is obviously not a word, like 0x12345678. It's not suggesting that you make something up.
Furthermore, this isn't something about trying to be "absolutely pure" or something. It's a helpful lint to catch common cases. Nothing more, nothing less.
It's not more inclusive than anything else, it's just more like an hive mind
People try Rust because they think it will get them better salaries and automatically "safe programs"
They will flock away as soon as something else newer appears.
OTOH I've been part of the Elixir community since the beginning and I spoke personally with the creator Jose Valim and Erlang creator Joe Armstrong and they turned out to be the most welcoming humble uncredited geniuses among programming language creators who also build two of the best curated and functioning communities there are. No bullshit, high quality software, organic growth, tooling etc Rust in comparison is just a C++ community with younger and somewhat ageist/elitist members, with diminishing results over time (yes, they are rewriting stuff that already works, WOW!)
how about improve the tooling?
I've watched the video on Matrix 2 at FOSSDEM and when the speaker says they wrote the new client (ElementX) using Rust SDK people applauded for no reason and he said: "Rust fans as usual"
A community that ensures kindness and compassion for marginalized members is built into their DNA will probably have that same kindness and compassion for everyone. Literally no downside to elevating LGBTQ members as far as I can tell.
Next, I am wondering when LGBT people will get tired by all of those who pretend to be LGBT people just to earn some discount, conference invitation, being better treated at school or work. Old French movie about a guy pretending to be a gay to avoid being fired will no longer be just a funny movie with 50% people claiming they are LGBT.
The LGBT part is barely mentioned (one sentence of a couple paragraphs on the code of conduct), and the overall motif of this point (relatively minor in the article's context) is less "we are propping LGBT coders" and more "we attract a more diverse community because we discourage toxic assholes".
So much of coding culture needs to chill out and the tools should be let to diversity into different communities, if people wanna fight about politics/gender/inclusion/etc, they should use the appropriate channels for that instead of putting everyone into a situation where you have to choose sides.
No, it's a way for programmers to keep doing programming with less distractions, of which we already have a metric ton.
Forgive me if I don't want politics in my work. If I want to do political activism then I know where to go. Unlike many others, you included, apparently.
People who hate those who are different are out there, that's known. But they will not be defeated by annoying literally everyone else.
I know. You'll say something along the lines that not taking a side is defending bullies or whatever. These arguments are extremely tiring and borderline fanatic, so I'm just passing by to give you the perspective of a fairly average guy, and peace out.
It seems people will never learn that shoving stuff in others' faces is not supporting their cause. Oh well. History will keep repeating itself then.
Political activism is not effective unless it inconveniences people, because otherwise people can freely ignore it and sequester it as something they don't have to care about.
Business and professionalism concerns would make it expedient to avoid bringing political conflicts into the workplace.
There is plenty of time to organize, advocate, etc without inflaming the workplace and creating a toxic environment.
It's like going to a Wendy's and instead of asking "how much for the burger" you start a conversation like "I am bald. Do you like bald people? Is this Wendy's aware of bald people existence? Do you recognize us as people? Do you stand by our side or not?"
Then you review the Wendy's: "Did not speak my language. Not bald. Probably racist. Won't come again."
I've literally never read a single sentence about it nowhere else since 1983 when I got my C64 and wrote my first Basic program.
But I was working in workplaces were LGBTQ+ people were the majority in the middle 90s.
They were called simply gay or lesbian back then.
No one blinked an eye about it, it was already considered normal and not something that should be talked about plenty at work.
In Italy, above all the places...
C/C++ are successful because even my mother knows about them.
Not that these project become/are successful but the fact that LGBTQ people enjoy helping to make it successful. e.g. "Everyone thought this software was weird, scary and looked down upon it but we helped prove that it is a wonderful thing once you get to know it"
can we stop idolizing things that are so common, they're boring?
I've worked with LGBTQ people in software engineering before the LGBTQ acronym was even invented and they were 10 to 20 years older than me already in the 90s...
Why there are people pretending that the World did not exist and had different rules before Rust?
Is Rust a new kind of religion?
It looks like it is for some people.