|
|
|
|
|
|
by eduction
1218 days ago
|
|
|
This is a reasonable comment, even as a Clojure fan, I think this fits with how the community thinks of itself to some extent. I can't provide a specific citation but I know there is at least one talk (maybe Simple Made Easy but don't quote me lol) where Rich Hickey talks about the fact that one reason "easy" tools -- which in his view provide fast uptake but more problems down the line due to being "complected" in how they deal with various concerns of the underlying problem -- are so popular is that people who manage programmers (like some of the positions you mentioned) want to be able to easily put butts in chairs, to readily replace engineers like they are cogs in a machine, so they are very willing to make this trade of short term ease for long term pain because less training is required to get to a near term deliverable. It's also clear (see Hickey talk Effective Programs, 10 Years of Clojure, where he surveys the room) that Clojure programmers tend to be senior (real senior not 5 years experience "senior") and a little grumpy about the state of the art, opinionated, and don't want to be cogs. This may also explain the allergic reaction among people who manage programmers/engineers. Managers as a rule (especially at certain orgs) tend to want people who are more compliant and less free thinking and likely to push back. Anyway I think you make a good point except I disagree about its survival long term. I think there's something to be said about the value of being more popular among older more seasoned programmers vs PMs. How many PMs in the 90s foresaw the rise of Linux (vs proprietary unix and Windows), how many go overboard on "agile", how many were into ruby on rails before it picked up among programmers, etc. Managers tend to be a lagging indicator (speaking very broadly). |
|
|