Elektrine lite

← Feed

@athas@freeradical.zone

Post #2235301

2026-02-01 16:41 UTC

@suetanvil@freeradical.zone A lot of those examples were all about refusing to solve the difficult problem and realising you could get away with it, however. Forth and Unix in particular. Even today, Forth tends towards radical iconoclasm.

Replies (2)

  • @suetanvil@freeradical.zone 2026-02-01 18:23

    @athas@freeradical.zone False, except *maybe* for later Forth. Unix was always "do abstraction layers perfectly or not at all". I've seen *vast* quantities of bitching about Unix scripting and it *never* turns into anything better. The best you get is PowerShell which is... a thing. (Yes, I know about nushell; no, I don't want to argue about it.) (And as for Lisp, an army of Lisp weenies is currently tracking you down. I suggest changing your name and running into the wilderness.)

    Open ##2235302

  • @millihertz@oldbytes.space 2026-02-01 19:03

    @athas@freeradical.zone @suetanvil@freeradical.zone "refusing to solve the difficult problem and realising you can get away with it" is exactly what software engineering is about. a lot of "difficult problems" turn out to be seventeen simple problems in a trenchcoat, and you only need to solve the one that applies to you; conversely, sometimes *over*generalising a difficult problem turns it into a simpler one - there's a couple of examples of that in Thinking Forth the point isn't to shy away from the difficult problem, but not to take it at face value - to prod at it until you're absolutely certain you need to solve exactly all of it.

    Open ##2235306