I’m not triggered by any of this. I’m not sure why my thinking the question is inane would count as “being triggered”.

Upvotes does not necessarily mean people agree with OP’s stance.

It should mean they think it’s a useful/interesting question and I think it very much is not. It’s just someone whining that it doesn’t look like something they’re used to and a bunch of very patient people generously leading them through the very basics of the language that’s well covered in many introductory tutorials - as such it makes it all a waste of time and worthy of being buried.

The more time I spend on Lemmy the more depressed I am about its potential.

Stupid, wrong-headed comments get solid upvotes if they also hint at some popular sentiment. I even see comments that are literally unreadable nonsense get solidly upvoted, either by bots or by people who just like the vibe they feel from scanning it and don’t care that it’s gobbledygook. Some content makes me wonder if half of Lemmy is just LLMs barfing back and forth at each other.

Then this post is heavily upvoted, even though it’s nothing more than “the syntax isn’t the same as the other language(s) I have seen, waaaaa!”. Is it just people like to see Go criticized? Because there are actual real issues that could be discussed.

But use type annotations everywhere and make sure your code is always checker clean (with checkin or PR CI hooks). And don’t turn off any lint checks through laziness, e.g. docstring checks. Even for a solo dev it’s always worth having everything typed, checker clean, and docstrings (even if they only effectively say “this thing really is what you’d assume”). It all saves time and effort in the long and even medium term.

I’ve worked on serious large scale Python projects and frankly it’s been very pleasant and productive, but only with the above conditions.

Well, it’s not modal by default. It is if you want it to be.

Ubuntu Mono since it was in beta and I heard the designer from Dalton Maag — the typeface design studio commissioned to design it — give a talk about how excited he was to be able to create a comprehensive, carefully thought out, and truly free/libre font.

I’ve never seen another one that I prefer the look of, and now it’s imprinted in my brain. People love to crap on Shuttleworth / Canonical / Ubuntu, but there are a lot of great things they’ve contributed over the years.

Still climbing that learning curve after decades now, and the payoffs keep building.

It’s a real programmers’ environment. One you code to grow and mold to your needs.

The biggest irony is it's often told by vim fanboys, who apparently don't realize a very comprehensive emulator of vim it is one of the editors Emacs offers. But mostly it seems to be told by people who don't even know what Emacs is, they just know they're meant to disapprove of it.

I'd call that an IDE, but also one that makes using a non-IDE editor superfluous.

Emacs includes vim though. So what would it need to include to have a good text editor of vim isn’t it?

I am just regurgitating one of my favorite Perl jokes for a laugh. Though for me the joke contains some truth. Most of the Perl code I’ve ever seen is pretty impenetrable for non-Perl programmers. I quite literally have returned to my own Perl efforts after just a couple of weeks and had some trouble working out what the code is doing (in ways I do not experience with other languages).

When Python was trying to unseat Perl, that in my view was reason alone to prefer it: I didn’t know Python but I could read Python. Though at that point Perl had the benefit of loads of libraries and ubiquity, and Python hadn’t got there yet. But it was enough to have me cheering for Python’s success at the expense of Perl. I get that Perl has many virtues, but they’re nullified by the ugliness and relative inaccessibility of its code in my eyes.

I really hate the magic side-effect variables where you do a pattern match or something and then various obtusely named variables have meaningful values with relation to the last match. To me that’s just flat out bad coding, and it’s built into the language.

The above was my second-favorite Perl joke. My favorite being:

Perl is the vise-grips* of programming languages. It’s a tool that can do most jobs, and it’s the wrong tool for all of them.

*BrEng: mole-grips

Yes, as long as you just type annotation and checker-clean code.

Asyncio programming is a delight, context-based constructs can make sophisticated code safe, robust, and clear. Anything mildly popular you want to interface with probably has a library… There are major advantages to swimming in the mainstream.

Yes it may have grubby and suboptimal corners, but in the real world, making things happen, problems are easy to avoid usually.

Perl is a write-only language.

I blame the easy-to-use guis

All the people I’ve worked with seem to use the command line. They just don’t know much beyond “commit everything” and basic push/pull/branch/merge.

Conversely I learned most of what they don’t know direct from the magit GUI. So I often don’t know the specific command arguments. Not a good thing, but only a problem for communicating what to do to others.

Isn’t there a magit-alike plugin for vscode? I have found it so frustrating working with devs who don’t use magit, because most seem to find slightly more advanced git like squash and fixup and cherry picking to be impossibly hard.

That's not the issue. The issue is inherently seeing white as meaning good and black as meaning bad.

I do think dropping master is absurd, since it in no way implies slavery or any such thing. master mostly has uses that are entirely inoffensive, unless post-graduate degrees are racist, for example.

But I do think there is some merit in moving off the idea of white is good and black is bad. There are some good arguments that we shouldn't bestow magic powers upon words, but there is also a lot of merit in the idea that these words affect our perception in negative ways and there is really nothing lost by shifting to equally good alternatives.