Joel Spolsky follows up on yesterday's FUD, and immediately steps into the quicksand:
Since we are not blub programmers, we like closures, active records, lambdas, embedded SQL a la LINQ, etc. etc. and so those are the kinds of features we put into Wasabi.
You have to love that - "we are not blub programmers". As opposed to everyone else who reads his blog, apparently. From yesterday:
These debates are enormously fun and a total and utter waste of time, because the bottom line is that there are three and a half platforms (C#, Java, PHP, and a half Python) that are all equally likely to make you successful, an infinity of platforms where you're pretty much guaranteed to fail spectacularly when it's too late to change anything (Lisp, ISAPI DLLs written in C, Perl), and a handful of platforms where The Jury Is Not In, So Why Take The Risk When Your Job Is On The Line? (Ruby on Rails).
He spends the rest of the post trying to backpedal from yesterday's silliness, and trying to explain why the approach they use is a good one. For instance:
Should you write your own compiler? Maybe, if you're doing something that's different enough from the mainstream and if there's no good off-the-shelf technology for your problem. There's a good chance that the domain you're working in could really use a domain-specific language.
Sure Joel, bug tracking systems are so very, very far outside the mainstream of development. No one else has ever thought to write such an application. At the end of the day, he's really saying this: he and his team are just soooo brilliant that they can handle this extra complexity. The rest of you? Nah, you can't handle it (or worse, you might be able to compete with him, especially if you set up shop somewhere less expensive than NYC) - so you dummies better stick with Java (et. al.).
To quote Bugs Bunny: What a Maroon.
Update: Chris Petrilli piles on with some good points.
Technorati Tags: FUD