Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | scriptproof's comments login

When I do a search, 9 out of 10 questions that are useful to me were closed as off topic. Fortunately they are not deleted. I confirm also the bias toward new users: I once registered to provide an answer which was missing to a question. Someone, an older user, modified my answer and deleted a part of it, so it then looked rather dumb. Obviously it was downvoted. I never came back.

Yes, that's a problem: Old users with high reputation abusing their power to edit other people's questions and answers.

Personally, I find it distasteful when somebody other than the question or answer's original author makes a substantial edit. Edits by third parties ought to be to fix typos, fix bad code formatting, improve clarity and the like.

One of the main points of the editing system is to fix the biggest problem with Q&A sites before SO - outdated information. Editing other's posts means that content can get updated, even if the original poster isn't around to curate it.

Everyone I've heard hating on StackOverflow are people asking or answering, who have ownership over their questions and dislike the rules or way the site works. The reality is that SO knows 99% of it's users never register and are reading answers, not asking or answering questions.

The reason SO is a great resource is that the rules create an environment that doesn't allow cruft to build. Yes, that puts off some people, that's a worthy trade in my mind. I'd rather have good content than more content.

My attitude is that, if they're going to close a question as offtopic, then put it in your robots.txt for Google to exclude that page.

Why is StackOverflow polluting Google with content its moderators deem "not appropriate for the website"?

Do you realize how many times I've had a question, googled it, and the #1 result was "StackOverflow - offtopic, closed"?

I suggest this reading to each author before making a new language: http://www.scriptol.com/programming/languages-with-no-progra...

I am not convinced by the "JOIN" argument, but other points could make sense.


But you are lucky if your project has a large group of programmers. There is more probably a large group of projects with a small group of programmers. There are also some large projects: Linux, KDE, LibreOffice, VLC, LLVM, etc... and none is written in Go.


>Linux (1991)

>KDE (1996)

>LibreOffice (based on StarOffice, 6.0 released in 2002)

>VLC (2001)

>LLVM (2003)

I think you have a point r.e there being more smaller projects than large projects with large teams. But this is a terrible argument. Go was released in 2007. Are you being facetious or are you suggesting that porting a mature codebase to Go is that easy? CoreOS was released in 2013 and so was Docker. I know that Docker actually ported to Go after the fact, but it was still relatively young and Go was already mature by then.


Go was released in late 2009.


This is a weird argument to make, since Go was first introduced in 2009 and the first stable version was released in 2012. All those projects precede Go by a decade or more.

Also, despite Go's short existence, there are already a surprising number of large Go project (Docker, Syncthing, etcd).


In the article it is said by moving from Oracle to Datastax support, the cost was down from $500 000 to $90 000. Oracle support has a cost too.


There is also the sourceforge example. Since they can not make enough money with ads on the site to survive, they put them in the archives. They will die also at the end, but a lot of projects with them.


I have carefully compared the two languages and I do not see more similarity than between Go and Swift or any other language. You have yourself cited the different memory management models, and this is the main characteristic of Rust. The sole common feature is the use of LLVM.


"After a few years I found out that this was due to the hard keys of my keyboard." Several years? Because doctors are not free? (joke)


A language that accesses the hardware (OS, drivers...). Java is definitively not a system language unlike C++. I an not sure Rust have to be a system language.


In the future, JavaScript will be the virtual machine of many languages. But maybe "real programmers" still will use JS code directly.





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