Content: A lot of subjective preferences, with the only thing people are probably doing "wrong" being not properly mapping files as inputs and outputs (which could be a correctness problem but is probably either a mere inefficiency or complete non-issue).
If this had been titled, say, "An opinionated approach to writing Makefiles", or perhaps "How to use GNU Make in a completely unorthodox way that I really like", I wouldn't mind it so much.
The purpose of a title is both to summarize content and grab the readers attention. It's up the author which one they put for emphasis on.
You clicked so it worked, even if you don't like it.
The user only saw the headline and closed, isn't the author aiming visitors to read the content or clicks?
The same analogy could be made to a baker luring customers in their bakery with an attractive facade but the very same "customers" just give a quick glimpse and leave.
In fairness, I did in fact read more or less the whole thing. I walked away with a fairly low opinion of the article and the author, but I did read it :)
Content: A lot of subjective preferences, with the only thing people are probably doing "wrong" being not properly mapping files as inputs and outputs (which could be a correctness problem but is probably either a mere inefficiency or complete non-issue).
If this had been titled, say, "An opinionated approach to writing Makefiles", or perhaps "How to use GNU Make in a completely unorthodox way that I really like", I wouldn't mind it so much.