Re:Threads Are a Bad Idea for Most Purposes (1995) [pdf]
by pdimitar on Tuesday January 28, 2020 @06:58PM
(#22175568)
A lot of things are possible for us the humans. But some your brain gets easier and works better with while others are a struggle even if it gets them right most of the time.
You don't have to make this about implying that others don't have "at least a bit of common sense and discipline".
Re:Threads Are a Bad Idea for Most Purposes (1995) [pdf]
by FpUser on Tuesday January 28, 2020 @11:16PM
(#22177379)
I'll go the other way around. Some people are capable of comprehending an awful lot of things/concepts and use those productively. And some are not. It is definitely not the concept's inventors fault. Nothing to be ashamed of as we are all different. I am not shedding tears because I can not fathom quantum physics while others can.
"Multithreaded programming is still one of the most problematic activities even for senior programmers, to this day. Multithreading bugs get written and fixed every day."
Strongly disagree. I am going to claim that threads / locking are not hard to write if one has at least a bit of common sense and discipline. Problem is that we have hobbyists without any trace of knowledge on how computers work producing commercial software.
Goes like this: I do not want to deal with memory management - it is too hard, I do not want to think about types - my poor brain can not comprehend those, pointers - OMG what are those beasts, threads and locking - gonna commit Seppuku. I will advise those to come to a logical conclusion: programming is frigging hard when one wants to produce a decent product rather then buggy POS. No matter how many concepts the language hides / converts to something else there will be always something else they will not be able to wrap their mind around. So how about trying gardening instead