[raphlinus]

I think the tradition of April Fools (and related, Onion-like satire) serves an important epistemological function, even more relevant and important in today's information environment. You cannot rely on tone and confident expression, but rather read critically.

In this particular case, what's being satirized are a fairly complex mix of perceptions about community and what actually builds a programming language ecosystem. I was able to poke gentle fun at myself (the Android font vulnerability) while also taking down some of the worst arguments out there, sadly common though. All this would be hard to express as a straight opinion piece.

Probably the biggest problem with this piece is that it has a moderately specialized audience. If you follow the adoption of Rust closely, hopefully you'll get a good chuckle. If you're only dimly aware of that, then there are too many insider jokes.

[I had intended to be "in character" in the comments here today, but have reconsidered. Appreciate the feedback, and happy to discuss substantive points]

[laund]

i only really learnt Rust 1 year ago. Combined with a awful memory for names, i had no clue who wrote the article.

Now, the thing is, it's entirely believable to me. Having witnessed the Stroustrup paper which honestly had some way less believeable yet honest reactions, i didn't even blink an eye.

I would have gone in with my day believing "well that's just dumb" had something not compelled me to click this post linked in the same mastodon post.

i wonder if the target audience might just be way too small for a post like this.

[pclmulqdq]

To be fair to the commenters here, I don't know you, I use both Rust and C++, and I have followed both languages pretty closely for a while without paying attention to the "characters" (the personalities and drama just don't interest me). This didn't hit as a joke to me - it hit as someone who was running from Rust to C++ for bad reasons, and doing it badly.

The arguments you were trying to make in a satirical way have basically already been accepted by everyone (except the small slice of people who will never be convinced by them), so the satire just doesn't make sense. Part of the humor of satire is that you are laughing at the fact that some people on the other side of the argument might agree with it.

[sime2009]

I'm in the same boat as you and laund here. I don't follow the "inside sports" aspects of C++ or Rust, but I am interested in different languages and how they develop. So the name on the blog means nothing to me. This post just looked like yet another poor defense of C++ to me. I've seen this kind of thing plenty of times of the years but by people arguing in (mostly) good faith. Even the "good programmers don't make memory errors" thing has been argued by plenty of C++ acolytes on the net.

Satire is dead.