Super language myth
I just read the next version of the myth of how some esoteric programming language (most often Lisp or Haskell) can become a secret weapon that allows a team to exceed the expectations by orders of magnitude. Paul Graham globally spread this myth ( Beating the Averages ), and the myth was passed down from generation to generation. But it is a lie. Even worse, it reinforces the real scourge of our industry - intellectual elitism.
Objective evidence of a difference in productivity in programming indicates that it is almost entirely associated with individual cognitive differences in programmers. No matter what language a great programmer uses, he will still be orders of magnitude more productive than a mediocre programmer, whatever he wrote.
The dubious benefits of esoteric languages are the effect of being chosen. Here is a typical scenario. Most of the truly intelligent programmers think that they are too good to waste on the programming of ordinary applications. But besides, they love esoteric languages that demonstrate how smart they are. So, they can be forced to write applications, allowing them to use their adored languages for clever people. Presto! Remarkable result. But cleaned up will not be embarrassed by the introduction. Once the fun development is finished, they disappear. Then come professional programmers and dumbfounded contemplate the magnificent monument of mental masturbation. The system is ejected and rewritten in a normal programming language using normal techniques available to normal people. Super programmers accuse everyone of being stupid, inflating their sense of superiority even more.
There are no super programming languages, there are only superprogrammers. And, it seems, they are also superdrochery. I know, I was one of them. What really gives the power of a programming language is the ability to use it by normal people.
')
from the translator: the request of those who have not read Graham, at the beginning will get acquainted with his article - this is a very entertaining reading, and then express your opinion
Objective evidence of a difference in productivity in programming indicates that it is almost entirely associated with individual cognitive differences in programmers. No matter what language a great programmer uses, he will still be orders of magnitude more productive than a mediocre programmer, whatever he wrote.
The dubious benefits of esoteric languages are the effect of being chosen. Here is a typical scenario. Most of the truly intelligent programmers think that they are too good to waste on the programming of ordinary applications. But besides, they love esoteric languages that demonstrate how smart they are. So, they can be forced to write applications, allowing them to use their adored languages for clever people. Presto! Remarkable result. But cleaned up will not be embarrassed by the introduction. Once the fun development is finished, they disappear. Then come professional programmers and dumbfounded contemplate the magnificent monument of mental masturbation. The system is ejected and rewritten in a normal programming language using normal techniques available to normal people. Super programmers accuse everyone of being stupid, inflating their sense of superiority even more.
There are no super programming languages, there are only superprogrammers. And, it seems, they are also superdrochery. I know, I was one of them. What really gives the power of a programming language is the ability to use it by normal people.
')
from the translator: the request of those who have not read Graham, at the beginning will get acquainted with his article - this is a very entertaining reading, and then express your opinion
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/95079/
All Articles