261–270 of 343 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it did you'd just build a version with the offensive code removed?
Ah yes. I have the time and the knowledge to "just" remove that code and "just" build that version. When even the simplest libraries can't usually be built using the instructions the authors leave for them (if they even do that)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine being on your deathbed thinking: "Configuring vim was so fun. Totally worth it". I sometimes feel that most people on this forums are under 24 years of age. So sad to read these comments. So much to do, so many interesting things.... but people enjoy configuring text editors...
If people enjoy it, why do you think they would regret it later? It sounds like you just don't enjoy it, which is ok.
What I find truly bizarre is how many software engineers, who are aware of how much they earn and how long it really takes to make software, are so resistant to paying anything for tools that make their job easier and faster. It blows my mind. Take the Jetbrains IDEs. I don't mean to offend any VSC fans out there but the Jetbrains IDEs are simply better and more mature in every single way. For individual use, most of…
> but the Jetbrains IDEs are simply better and more mature in every single way That's just not true. I have access to the full Jetbrains suite for free, yet I still opt to use Neovim or VS Code/Codium for most languages. Jetbrains IDEs are great in many ways, but are objectively worse on several metrics: * slow startup times * slow initial operations until the JIT is warmed up * even once warm, you always eventually…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I was increasingly getting upset about their extension marketplace, where there is an increased number of extensions starting to sell pro versions of the extensions we used for free. So, "I'm a professional developer, but I don't like other programmers getting paid for their extensions (that I do, nonetheless, find valuable, and want to use)"?
I love this developer dissonance where they work at companies selling software, but refuse to pay for others’ software. Truly a sight to behold!
But for programmers living off programming? Less so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Does it magically then not become "rent seeking" any more? The difference is that i can just stop buying the new stuff once the software does everything i need though. That way i might miss out on shiny new features, but as long as the thing i bought the software for gets done I really don't have a need to purchase new versions.
How long do you expect the version you own to be supported though? Security updates? Bug fixes? Feature requests?
New features are adding value. This is something that the developers should be paid for! Releasing a new version for features is justified.
Security updates/bug fixes on the other hand are "fixing" things with their product. In my opinion those should be provided because developers should strive to develop good products.
But to give you a somewhat more clear answer: I don't expect new features. I expect Security and bug updates until the next version+a bit of time.
If there is a version released every year i would expect Security/bug fixes for at least one year. Two years would be the developers be great, three years would have me surprised. Anything beyond that would be far more than I ever expected.
I'm already paying for sublime text and a few other developer tools and I wouldn't mind paying for a tool that helps me pay my bills. Also I like that some of these products have a free version that makes it accessible to people coming from a poor economic background. Everyone deserves an equal opportunity in my opinion. Now my problem about big tech corps is that they are huge bullies. I want my freedom back. Freedo…
Completely. In the corporate world, Microsoft is the dominant player, but on premise is still a thing, as are other ESPs. Gmail is nowhere near as dominant as people seem to think it is. They still transact over SMTP...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paying for software does not have a relationship with quality. Imagine if GCC had a "pro" version that was necessary to compile certain code. That would be devastating to those learning and thousands of devs that came before would be spinning in their graves. The reason we do open source and free software is to make life easier for everyone, including your job. It standardizes practices and prevents mudball codebases…
Calling GCC a "good" compiler is going a bit far, imo. LLVM has become the dominant compiler framework (and thus clang, clang++, golang, etc use it) because of corporate interests. GCC as it's constructed is a horrible framework. The way you port GCC to a new platform (say, a weird ARM variant) is to fork it hard and mangle multiple parts of the internals , then carefully feed it back. It's a mess. Nobody should be f…
You missed a third place: government funding. Ironic, given that LLVM itself started as a University of Illinois research project. Private interests love taking credit for publicly-funded research:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/apr/15/oxfordastraz...
What I find truly bizarre is how many software engineers, who are aware of how much they earn and how long it really takes to make software, are so resistant to paying anything for tools that make their job easier and faster. It blows my mind. Take the Jetbrains IDEs. I don't mean to offend any VSC fans out there but the Jetbrains IDEs are simply better and more mature in every single way. For individual use, most of…
At work, our huge C++ project makes CLion very slow..
VSCode MS Intellisense works quite badly but at least it's faster (testing the CLang extension is in my TODO list).
> I was increasingly getting upset about their extension marketplace, where there is an increased number of extensions starting to sell pro versions of the extensions we used for free. This is actually great news. Some extensions, especially language ones, are very poor, and paying for them (if someone makes a commercial version) is the only way to guarantee a good development experience. Ruby is an example, and swit…
reminds me when Bethesda tried to introduce paid mods on Steam. I was greatly excited about that for the reasons you state. But the gaming community being physically or mentally at an age of 14 prevented that with quite an outreach. Would've thought someone with enough braincells to learn programming would look at this differently, but there you have it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If people enjoy it, why do you think they would regret it later? It sounds like you just don't enjoy it, which is ok.
A lot of regret actually comes from enjoying something and then later realising that it was stupid and a waste of time. Time that you would have liked to spend on a more useful endeavour.