7 ms·
> I didn't want to do it in C, and I didn't want to learn Rust. Sounds like you made a decision right there. The rest is just retro-justification, not a logica
by speed_spread 1mo ago
> I didn't want to do it in C, and I didn't want to learn Rust.
Sounds like you made a decision right there. The rest is just retro-justification, not a logical argument or comparative between options. It works for you, good.
- geodel 1mo agoRetro-justification is not some flaw it is most common way people choose tech stacks. The only logic that matters most of time is business logic of solution serving problem statement and not logic of choosing a technical stack.
- genxy 1mo agoPost hoc rationalization The choice we made for other reasons is the best one for these constructed reasons that didn't exist until later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choice-supportive_bias Measuring and Mitigating Post-hoc Rationalization in Reverse Chain-of-Thought Generation https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.14469 https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.14469
- stouset 1mo agoThe original point was that go is not a Pareto-optimal choice along any set of language criteria. "I didn't feel like choosing $LANG's competitors, so I went with $LANG" might be how languages are chosen for projects in the real world, but it's not exactly a convincing rebuttal to the argument being made.
- dimgl 1mo agoIt was and is a logical argument. Both C and Rust are much harder to learn.
- speed_spread 1mo agoConsidering the article was about usage for development by LLM, the learning difficulty should be a minor factor.