[rust-dev] on quality & success

Sanghyeon Seo sh4.seo at samsung.com
Wed Jan 1 21:57:46 PST 2014

> Deciding to reuse wrong, but mainstream, design decisions in one's own language
> is deciding to intentionally make it of lower quality. !!! Funny (read: mad),
> isn't it? It is thus also intentionally deciding to make it not worth success.
> This, apparently, to make its actual chances of success higher. (Isn't our
> culture funny?)

First, thank you for bringing up the important point.

While I agree that many language designers do decide to intentionally make it of
lower quality according to their subjective measure of quality, this is in no way new,
mad, or funny. Your error seems to be thinking that such decisions make the language
not worth success -- but in actuality such decisions make the language *less* worth
success, and worth rarely reaches zero. Abstractly, if such decisions raise the chance
of success higher, it can increases the expected worth of success.

I consider creating a new programming language analogous to forming a new political
party. (I pity you if you live in a two-party system.) For any given party, its platform is
distinctly inferior to any of its supporter's ideal platform. In other words, party supporters
are compromising in order to cooperate. People compromise in order to cooperate,
because, even if compromising on your ideal is painful, cooperation is often much better
way to change the world. Of course, one is free to conduct political activism alone,
but such people usually do not consider political parties mad or funny.


More information about the Rust-dev mailing list