Understand that there are two worlds: one is called "production software" because there is no need to talk about it in order to see it in production. The other is the world of beautiful code. That's the one that has to be talked about because it would not exist otherwise.
It certainly must be admitted that to 'monkey-patch' is a form of conduct quite unbefitting an artist, the very obscurity and incomprehensible character of such a crime adding something to its horror.
OH: "Do you think that a man who has once committed a murder could possibly do the same crime again? Don't tell me that."
- "Oh! Anything becomes a pleasure if one does it too often"
It's silly to argue Programming should reflect Nature: Dogs extend Animals that move(), a river is identity for causally related values in time. Life imitates Art more than Art imitates Life. A great artist invents a type and Life copies it. A CPU is a rock Art tricked to think
Simplicity, too, is not without its dangers. The enfant terrible with shameless love of convention over configuration, the raw country-bred dev who writes only what they need, and the blunt dev who makes a point of writing tiny microservices on every occasion, are fatal examples.
To those who willingly choose Prettier I say that there are moments when one has to choose between living one's own life, fully, entirely, completely- or dragging out some false, shallow, degrading existence that the world in its hypocrisy demands. You have that moment now.
Nowadays sadly there's so little useless programming. Still, there are devs well worth studying, who lie under the gum-tree, gather wattle blossoms, buddawong and sarsaparilla for their loves, and wander the glades of Mount Baw-baw listening to the careless raptures of the mopoke
As I look upon my git history, I am haunted by a feeling of loss. So much surrendered to such little purpose! There've been mad rejections, monstrous forms of self-torture and self-denial. The result is a degradation infinitely more terrible than that which we sought to escape.
Ah, Golang! Nothing could be less impressive than the unfortunate hero gravely heralding a dawn that rose long ago, and so completely missing its true significance that he proposes to carry on the business of the old firm under the new name.
If something cannot be done to check, or at least to modify, our monstrous worship of Types, Software will become sterile, and beauty will pass away from the land.
Types are not merely finding a footing-place in history, but they are usurping the domain of Nouns, and have invaded the kingdom of Verbs. Their chilling touch is over everything. They are vulgarising mankind.
The user of Types falls into careless habits of accuracy or takes to frequenting the society of the aged or well-informed. Both are fatal to his imagination. In a short time he develops a morbid, unhealthy faculty of truth-telling and verifies all statements made in his presence
Oh, to start a library! Facts flee before me like frightened forest things. My white fingers trod the mechanical keys till the wrists stab in pain and functions, composed in solitude and punctuated by tears, are born. It is an extraordinary improvisation.
Most devs never rise beyond misrepresentation, and actually condescend to prove, to discuss, to argue. How different from the temper of the true thought leader, with his frank, fearless statements, his superb irresponsibility, his healthy, natural disdain of proof of any kind!