News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Elm is Wrong by ungzd on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @07:00AM (#12909528)
BTW, why lots of people think it's very wrong and immoral to criticize inanimate pieces of technology in rude and offensive language? Political correctness?
Re:Elm is Wrong by adamlett on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @07:19AM (#12909632)
Whenever you feel the urge to use, or see others using the term political correctness, try mentally substituting it with behaving respectfully. The exercise can be enlightening.
Re:Elm is Wrong by lasfter on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @08:00AM (#12909896)
That doesn't seem like a useful exercise because political correctness does not always equate to behaving respectfully, even if there is overlap (i.e. most respectful behaviour is politically correct and vice versa).

I could just as well suggest you mentally substitute the phrase helping the needy with kicking puppies whenever you encounter it.

Re:Elm is Wrong by adamlett on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @08:21AM (#12910027)
political correctness does not always equate to behaving respectfully

Could you provide an example of when it doesn't?

Re:Elm is Wrong by lasfter on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @11:51PM (#12917841)
For example, mocking masculinity/men, white people, Conservative people, etc is all "politically correct". I would not call it respectful to call Trump voters deplorables or to belittle issues that men face, but it's certainly not politically incorrect.
Re:Elm is Wrong by adamlett on Thursday November 10, 2016 @08:18AM (#12920078)
I think I see what you mean, but in my experience, this is not how most people understand or use that term. Wikipedia backs me up on this:

The term political correctness (…) in modern usage, is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended primarily not to offend or disadvantage any particular group of people in society.

Re:Elm is Wrong by pfortuny on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @08:57AM (#12910245)
"safe spaces" in Universities.
Re:Elm is Wrong by adamlett on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @09:14AM (#12910388)
I see no use of the term political correctness.
Re:Elm is Wrong by lukeasrodgers on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @11:01AM (#12911178)
I can't speak for it being immoral, but basically, using rude and offensive language tends to undermine rational discourse. If your purpose is get at the truth, then it is prudent to avoid such language.

However, a lot of writing (academic, journalistic, what have you) has "getting at the truth" as only one of its goals among many, including "expressing my feelings," "attacking someone else," "playing with poetic language," "sounding smart," etc.

Re:Elm is Wrong by jrheard on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @07:10AM (#12909577)
There are people on the other end of the screen who built the technology, and they have feelings :)

Being nice is good.

Re:Elm is Wrong by canadaduane on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @11:49AM (#12911822)
And being polite ("nice") makes it more likely that people who don't yet know each other well will receive mutual advantage through collaboration.
Re:Elm is Wrong by keithnz on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @05:48PM (#12915588)
someone posted this to HN the other day https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Crocker%27s_rules .. I thought it was quite good, it means sometimes articles like this, with their emotional language gives you information that is useful... IF you refuse to take offense to it.
Re:Elm is Wrong by mfukar on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @08:00AM (#12909887)
Yes. Generally, tone policing in HN gets stronger with the passage of time. Many comments in here complain about the tone without even touching on the point.
Re:Elm is Wrong by elbear on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @09:01AM (#12910279)
Here's how I see his point.

He came to Elm expecting a Haskell for the web. Elm has the completely opposite philosophy of keeping things simple, even if it means extra boilerplate.

I can understand OP's frustration, but if he watched a few of Evan's talks (like this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSjbTC-hvqQ), he would realise his expectations about Elm are wrong. Also, he forgot that Elm (just like any other open source project) doesn't owe him anything. That's why many people take an issue with his tone.

In summary, Elm's target audience are JavaScript developers. It's developers who want their apps to be more robust and easier to refactor than in plain JavaScript. Sure, type classes are useful but they also increase complexity. Evan wants to see if there's a better solution and the Elm community generally accepts that.

Re:Elm is Wrong by mfukar on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @10:24AM (#12910853)
> Also, he forgot that Elm (just like any other open source project) doesn't owe him anything. That's why many people take an issue with his tone.

We can't take issue with his tone by appropriating information about Elm's direction in an ex post facto manner. The guy - whatever guy - is a newcomer to Elm, picks it up, see an obvious deficiency, asks (quite politely, I might add) about a feature addition, gets a dismissive answer. That's the context. We can't apply Evan's* rationale behind the reply here, because the OP never had the chance to have it revealed to him to the extent of his interaction.

I'm surprised I have to point this stuff out. However understanding we may be, surely we can see why anybody is frustrated with being dismissed like this?

* Apologies, but I don't actually know Elm's author's last name.

Re:Elm is Wrong by elbear on Thursday November 10, 2016 @10:39AM (#12921266)
As I said in my post, I understand OP's frustration. I understand that he expected more consideration for his efforts to learn the language and his suggestions for improvement.

The deficiency was only in his eyes though. Evan and the Elm community are fully aware of the type classes thing, because it's been mentioned by many people. He just doesn't see it as something that requires an immediate solution.

To summarize: I understand OP's frustration. At the same time, Elm (just like any other open source project) doesn't owe him anything. If you open a pull request or an issue you are not guaranteed a resolution in your favor. Ranting will help you vent but that's it.

Re:Elm is Wrong by zzguy on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @02:56PM (#12914019)
Is Elm open source? If so, couldn't the author implement the feature themselves? If the maintainer doesn't want it, then idk, fuck off? Nobody said he had to use it. When did open source turn into "Do whatever random people tell you to do, for free"? Talk about entitlement....
Re:Elm is Wrong by mfukar on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @04:02PM (#12914625)
> Is Elm open source? If so, couldn't the author implement the feature themselves?

Yeah!

Just create and maintain your own damn dialect of a language!

It's OPEN SOURCE, that means you automatically know and are an expert in anything it involves!

It's 2016, we can stop with that meme now.

Re:Elm is Wrong by leshow on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @09:55AM (#12910676)
> He came to Elm expecting a Haskell for the web

No, I don't think that's true. He came to Elm hoping there would be some useful ways to create abstractions in the language (that doesn't necessarily mean there has to be typeclasses. in fact, the whole article his him pursuing an alternate method of abstraction), and besides creating a function there really is none in Elm.

You must resign yourself to write the same boilerplate over and over. It is impossible to keep any large Elm project DRY.

Re:Elm is Wrong by walterstucco on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @03:54PM (#12914538)
and who cares? fork the project and add the feature yourself. when I buy banana yogurts at the supermarket, I don't write to the yogurt company asking to change the flavour if I don't like it. I just buy a different brand of yogurt. Elm is even free as in free beer and free speech!
Re:Elm is Wrong by michaelmrose on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @04:29PM (#12914857)
There is a limited interaction between yogurt buyers and yogurt makers that solely consists of buying or not buying stuff. There is more interaction between programming language creators and programmers and indeed between programmers about their tools.

Analysis in depth is a useful thing for not only the creator who is likely to already understand the trade offs he has made but for other current and potential users of the language.

Re:Elm is Wrong by matt4077 on Wednesday November 09, 2016 @04:30PM (#12914860)
> Many comments in here complain about the tone without even touching on the point.

Then we'll either have to change all those commentators, or the original author – since one of the arguments against faul language is that it distracts.