I would like, at least in theory, to contribute to the programs I use. I hated that Vim had a splash screen about paying ugandans to breed. Obviously, I want nothing to do with such people, nor did I continue to use Vim— but that was more because an objectively superior alternative exists, which I sought out after digging into Vim's source to "correct" the splash screen and saw what a miserable little pile of IFDEFs it was.
Philosophy is not everything, but it's important. When I was shopping for a new language, I spent a lot of time with Nim, V, and Zig because they sidestepped taking the CoC. I ignored Crystal because it didn't, and I still don't know anything about it other than that it stinks of colorectal lube. I nonetheless visit the V discord and see a bunch of trannies and marxists, partly because that's how discord is, but also because that's how programmers are. The CoC is literally just "be nice and respectful" but you're surrounded by demented perverts anyway. Also the stuff you wrote about golang (and V by extension) being dumbed-down and painful is accurate. I ended up learning a little of a bunch of different things and gaining an appreciation of the true excellence of the language from which I was trying to "upgrade", but on the whole it seems like everything is fake and gay and if you want anything free of degenerates and tranny tyranny you'll just have to start it yourself, name it after a fascist dictator, and put a lot of swastikas in the branding. Stay tuned for ForthReich, coming in 2021!
I think the "suckless" approach is pretty good for managing the social aspects of software development. Politically you stay relatively neutral, but the values and goals of the project reflect an Aryan weltanschauung.
I'm only partly joking, but you see their IRC topic: "No patch handholding." Quality matters more than quantity, and a commitment to excellence over LCD appeal coupled with some kind of difficulty hurdle to repel mediocrities, make a project very appealing as a long-term investment. Particularly in projects where something is only as hard to use as it needs to be. BSPWM, for example, could be maintained by a pair of gay dads for all I know, but it's both hard to use in a way that makes sense in a minimalist sort of way, and which will repulse the sort of worthless poser who whines about manpages being "hard to read." It has an excellent design, both in user experience and in how it conserves resources. To leverage the design is contingent on some learning and configuration.
Of course, BSPWM is not part of Suckless. DWM is, and it's basically trash. Suckless is anti-bloat, and its software is written and configured in C. It is by its nature elitist. You can't do anything with it if you can't at least handle the C toolchain, etc. The problem is that the quality of the software kinda stinks. Something can only be so good when its selling point is what it doesn't have. Dmenu, for example, is inferior to running fzf in a terminal because fzf is more performant through its modern design (ie, it uses threads) whereas dmenu is simply "bloat free". Minimalism is perhaps a condition of excellence, but is not the thing in itself.
So I value social, political, and aesthetic qualities, as well as actual engineering competence, but lately the social aspect is pretty much a write-off whereas I'm making gains on engineering by switching shell tools from the ancient C implementations from before the era of dual-core processors, to ones made in that one faggy hipsterlang.
(post is archived)