Moving back to .NET

[Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 20:05:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad 
wrote:
> On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 19:07:08 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> I think there's a good bit of fear involved. I've seen this 
>> kind of behavior with other things, not just D. Nothing ever 
>> suits people, nothing will do. It's an excuse based on latent 
>> fear.
>
> Risk aversion is just good project management though.

As is more then occasionally the case, Ola, you use language 
cleverly to say something that may be literally acceptable but in 
order to evoke a meaning that is debatable.

It certainly isn't the case that the possible risk of using a 
less widely used framework is the kind of risk to which one 
should in all contexts at all times have a high degree of 
aversion towards.  It really depends what you are trying to do, 
and what your other options are.

Because life is risk, and using something else instead of D also 
has not just risks but costs, too.  And against the cost and risk 
of using D are certain benefits.

So, no, one can't say that in a blanket way risk aversion is good 
project management if what you care about is enterprise value 
rather than what people think of you.

And sensible mercantile consideration of what might go wrong and 
what you are going to do if that happens - that's a very 
different thing from what Chris was speaking about.  Because in 
enterprises it's often the case that social and group emotional 
factors are more influential day to day than rational 
calculation.  (There is an extensive literature on this).  Of 
course, everyone gives reasons for things - it's just that if you 
observe closely those aren't the real reasons (and the people 
themselves may be unaware of this).

> Fringe tools are delegated to smaller tasks, and that just 
> makes a lot of sense if you are looking at the failure 
> potential for a long term development plan. Java, Go and C++ 
> makes more sense as far as mitigating risk goes than Rust, Nim 
> and D.

They have different natures and solve different problems.  It's 
easy to speak about things in blanket terms, but it doesn't 
contribute towards clarity about in which circumstances a 
particular language is the right tool for the job.


Laeeth.