> Google the name of the person before responding to them

Is it a rule at HN that you can't take someone else's name? Otherwise, there's no guarantee that you're talking to the "Real" Walter Bright...

... or that you're talking to that Walter Bright, come to think of it.

There can be only one.

But The One doesn't get the username.

I’m new here, so this seems like a valid criticism to me — but judging by the number of downvotes, it may not be. Can someone explain why this comment is incorrect?

Perhaps because so many of know Walter from his work and his history here on HN? Sometimes you have to just trust that someone is who we all say they are.

Cool, thanks for the explanation.

It's fair argument but I also check karma point is high so it looks like legitimate account name in this case.

There's "arguments of authority" and then there's "accusing Walter Bright of having never written a line of code before".

AKA: Conflating authority with expertise

What argument from authority is being made by anyone?

The GP decided, out of the blue, to accuse the author of never having written a line of C code in his life. That's kind of inappropriate in any context, IMO, but just downright laughable when the author is well-known for singlehandedly writing several compilers and a whole new language.

Anyone that has to rely on their name for an argument isn't worth listening to.

You misunderstand what the conversation is that’s occurring. The parent implied the person had never written C.

He never said explicitly, he was just making a general statement. Not that it matters whether he did or didn't, there's a lot of things wrong with C, it will most likely eventually disappear, but not for reasons outlined in this article. That's what he was saying.

Well, he dismissed Bright’s argument as a random pet peeve from people who haven’t written a line of code in C before, so yes, I do think he said it explicitly.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

This is one of HN's comment guidelines. If you're not sure that someone is who you think they are, you can just ask, e.g.: "Hey, are you Walter Bright who did X and Y?"

? I’m confused how your comment relates to mine. Did you post on the wrong thread?

Someone once said COBOL would disappear.

C will still be used long after you and I and everyone here have returned to dust.

Try becoming a COBOL developer and see how that works for you. Likening C to COBOL isn't doing it any favors.

What's the implication here? I only know one COBOL developer but they seem to be doing quite well for themselves, making over $400k a year for something like 15 hours of work a week.

COBOL developers commanding a high salary is directly related to it not being a thriving language.

> C will still be used long after you and I and everyone here have returned to dust.

there are also people still riding horses. does not make it relevant in any way.