Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yeah, there's a lot dismissive about it.

Or, put more bluntly: stop being an asshole. It demeans you and what you're trying to champion.

> Yeah, there's a lot dismissive about it.

It's not. Different people have different intellectual capabilities. Some can read Hegel, most don't. Some understand Monads, most don't. That's how it is. Some can debug compile-time macros, others can't.

> Or, put more bluntly: stop being an asshole. It demeans you and what you're trying to champion

A personal attack. Great style!

Dude, I'm not even disagreeing with what you're saying. I'm saying you're being an asshole all over this thread.


I'm neither your dude nor your asshole.

Get some manners.

Well, he is right that you're definitely not polite.

Because I told you guys that not everyone is intelligent enough to be able to program Lisp on a competent level? Is that a surprise for you?

See the 2008 Ruby conference keynote from Yukihiro 'Matz' Matsumoto. He explains it in detail. Start at 8:40.


I have interviewed many Java programmers in the past five years. I never found one who could explain how GC works, what lambda in Java 8 does, etc. There are a lot of ordinary programmers out there, even some of them with ten years work experience were surprisingly bad at actual programming. I hired some good ones, but generally the number of not so good programmers is high. Giving them a language where code is data, is a recipe for failure...

There are tons of mediocre or even bad programmers out there, in any language. Many of them don't really understand the language they're supposed to master. Heck, there are a trillion C++ programmers out there and giving sub-par programmers access to C++ is also a recipe for failure. Did that ever stop any non-elitist language community?

The reason they're "accepted" is that ultimately they make an ecosystem bigger. They want IDEs, linters, debuggers & other tools, books & presentations & trainings, libraries, services, etc - most of which are paid and which allowed better programmers to earn a living. Some of them - a minority - actually move beyond this newbie phase and contribute something useful. They make crappy and less crappy libraries, some of which might be used by "code wizards" when they need to do something (after all, does anyone except for the military, maybe, 100% audit the code dependencies they have?).

Let them come, be nice, and they will filter themselves out.

I have an additional question for this debate: think about a problem you'd like to solve while developing an application as a start up. What's the likelihood that your problem is solved by several robust libraries in Java and in Lisp? I'd bet that Java probably has several, not just one, high quality open source implementations of the thing I'm looking for - despite the crappy programmers you mention. By high quality I mean - at least decent code quality, good documentation, a lot of examples, discussions about it on public forums, maybe even commercial support, etc.

Personally I would not want to work in a startup problem where I need Java.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact