Why are we still talking about this?
Why are we still talking about this? Every language that's vaguely close to a multi-purpose language is a competitor with every other language. There are people who write websites in X86 assembler and people who write embedded systems in Python. Rust and Go are competitors. Yes, they were intended for different things, but who cares? Any reasonable metric of language success is going to show one language pulling numbers from the other. Pick your metric: users? There are plenty of people who aren't using Rust because they're using Go, and vice-versa. Successful projects? There are plenty of projects which aren't being written in Go because they're being written in Rust, and vice-versa. Reliability and safety? Maybe Go would have a reasonable type system if Rust hadn't snapped up so many of the good thinkers in that field. Arguing about whether languages are competing based on what they were intended for is a pointless argument: there's no metric for success, no way to validate who's right or wrong. Are we really going to spend time arguing over what Google devs meant when they used the word "systems"? Seriously?
Posted by copsarebastards on Jul 2, 2015, 2:46 PM
Tags
Related issues
- The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
- The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
- (My comment is about detached houses).
- The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
- > steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
- Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.5,500 issues0 comments
hackernews (Other)
The biggest problem with having an LLM do this, from what I've observed of at least frontier models, is that the way they are trained...
The biggest problem with MOND is that it was hand-crafted with additional parameters simply to fit the data.
(My comment is about detached houses).
The biggest problem with this is that I can't run my company's own internal benchmarks against this API, because they will be trained int...
> steer Claude away from over-engineering parts of the system in response to hypothetical concerns.
Why is there no comparison with FLUX 3 Image?
> our Git monorepo was developing an annoying problem Sentences like this are so common from people using monorepos that I am convinced ...
Why is there no contact form?
Why are we still talking about this?
Why are we still talking about this? Every language that's vaguely close to a multi-purpose language is a competitor with every other language. There are people who write websites in X86 assembler and people who write embedded systems in Python. Rust and Go are competitors. Yes, they were intended for different things, but who cares? Any reasonable metric of language success is going to show one language pulling numbers from the other. Pick your metric: users? There are plenty of people who aren't using Rust because they're using Go, and vice-versa. Successful projects? There are plenty of projects which aren't being written in Go because they're being written in Rust, and vice-versa. Reliability and safety? Maybe Go would have a reasonable type system if Rust hadn't snapped up so many of the good thinkers in that field. Arguing about whether languages are competing based on what they were intended for is a pointless argument: there's no metric for success, no way to validate who's right or wrong. Are we really going to spend time arguing over what Google devs meant when they used the word "systems"? Seriously?
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.