I've come off seeing a lot of people express dissent in a rather acidic manner, so I just appreciate that you have stated an opposing view in a way that is informative, and a lot less "anyone who disagrees is [bad thing]", "I will say that anyone who approves of [thing I don't] masturbates to it as a way to be hurtful and insulting", "you disagree? I will position you as overly emotional and myself as the realist by saying 'Cope'", etc.

You've made me curious about various programming languages' efficiency, specifically in how choice of language might affect resource consumption. Not just CPU cycles but carbon and electricity. And I'm actually going to look into it instead of feeling put off enough by vitriol that I just wash my hands of the entire disagreement and walk away. +1, this is how you disagree online.

Yes, I may be venting my feelings about seeing too many people being mean online.

[–] turtle@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

Thanks for your thoughtful reply! I feel similarly about mean replies online, which is why I usually try not to contribute to that trend. If nothing else, I at least try not to escalate arguments.

Regarding programming languages' efficiency, it's a pretty interesting topic to consider in this time of climate change. There can be trade-offs like for example in the case of Python vs. Rust, while you gain a lot in terms of performance and resource utilization with Rust, you lose a lot in terms of development speed, from what I understand (I have not programmed with Rust yet, nor any large projects with Python). I hope that more programmers begin to consider these factors when picking a language to develop with.

Take care.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago

That was a nice comment