sinnsro

Shopify uses Ruby extensively and I don't think they are considering moving away from it (at least I am not aware of anything).

As a consequence, they have made lots of contributions and improvements to Ruby infrastructure. That includes two JIT compilers (YJIT and ZJIT) and a new parser.

FWIW, he even riffs on his own boss when referencing the "slop grenades".

I want to think that ConTeXt is that successor. While has a slightly different markup from LaTeX but is still familiar enough, I find it typesetting/markup to be both consistent and flexible.

It has the added bonus of being a monolithic tool —it packs everything one needs to typeset a document— but it is not as adopted as LaTeX, so there is not a lot of material on it.

Reading your post, it is clear to me that management and engineers will rediscover the theory of constraints at some point if they can connect the dots.

I fail to see your point, as the base pipes can be combined with blocks and wrapping the target function into another function.

Although, IMHO, if that many operations are crammed into a single pipe pass, then something is amiss.

The base pipe has an underscore as a placeholder. From the docs:

Usage:

     lhs |> rhs

Arguments:

     lhs: expression producing a value.

     rhs: a call expression. 

Details: [...]

     It is also possible to use a named argument with the placeholder
     ‘_’ in the ‘rhs’ call to specify where the ‘lhs’ is to be
     inserted.  The placeholder can only appear once on the ‘rhs’.

> we wanted Delphi and got Haskell instead

Please elaborate.

> However note the same phenomen happening with other languages, as soon as you have a team being paid to develop a language, their job depends on adding features in every single release.

Users also request those features. You said yourself that programming languages are products. In that sense, people are always evaluating them through the lenses of utility (the economics concept), and if they have to pick between two languages, with similar capabilities, they will pick up the one that maximises that utility.

This to weird design decisions getting inserted into the fabric as a consequence (the current state of C++ comes to mind). And given developers are too opinionated about everything, we get politics as a side effect.

I am not sure if the average executive is dumb or just shortsighted. Imagine making decisions based solely on the optics of the Pareto principle when corporate history itself says that is fraught with risk.

Bean Counter Tim is going to drive Apple into the ground before he does anything useful. Just look at the current state of the ecosystem when it comes to UI/UX and software stability.

> A very minor nit: Julia is a compiled language

Caught. Should have just listed the usual suspects (C, C++, maybe Rust nowadays?).

> and the best 2 solutions were in Julia. C++ was a close third, and Rust after that.

Awesome. Which type of problem was this, if you can share?