Hacker News Reader

Comment by dogleash | Hacker News Reader

> Our industry needs to finish what it starts.

"Our industry" is a pile of snakes that abhor the idea of collaboration on common technologies they don't get to extract rents from. ofc things are they way they are.

View on HN

Let's not fool ourselves by saying we're purely profit driven. Our industry argues about code style (:

Our industry does not argue about code style. There were a few distinct subcultures which were appropriated by the industry who used to argue about code style, lisp-1 vs lisp-2, vim vs emacs, amiga vs apple, single pass vs multi pass compilers, Masters of Deception vs Legion of Doom and the list goes on, depending on the subculture.

The industry is profit driven.

Do you use tabs or spaces? Just joking, but:

The point is that our industry has a lot of opinionated individuals that tend to disagree on fundamentals, implementations, designs, etc., for good reasons! That's why we have thousands of frameworks, hundreds of databases, hundreds of programming languages, etc. Not everything our industry does is profit driven, or even rational.

FWIW, all my toy languages consider U+0009 HORIZONTAL TABULATION in a source file to be an invalid character, like any other control character except for U+000A LINE FEED (and also U+000D CARRIAGE RETURN but only when immediately before a LINE FEED).

I’d be a python programmer now if they had done this. It’s such an egregiously ridiculous foot gun that I can’t stand it.

> > Our industry argues about code style (:

> Our industry does not argue about code style.

QED

I'm pretty sure this is QEF.

Our industry does not argue about arguing about code style.

Our industry doesn't always make Raymond Carver title references, but when it does, what we talk about when we talk about Raymond Carver title references usually is an oblique way of bringing up the thin and ultimately porous line between metadiscourse and discourse.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com