Where is the sense of history of someone whose entire experience of programming probably extends no further than 2-3 years into the past? This is a systemic problem in software. The average age of a "cutting-edge" programmer is always going to be under 30. People in their 20's are at a peak of performance, but merely in the foothills of judgement and knowledge of history, even software history.
Those who are successful in their careers in software become managers in their 30's and cease to take part in debates about languages, which accounts for their puerile tenor.
I'm nevertheless glad to see that you are still keeping an eye on things, Mr Dalke!
Do you have any evidence which helps confirm that "people in their 20's are at a peak of performance"?
I know in my case that in my 20s I implemented an algorithm for finding the maximum common subgraph between a set of N graphs. While in my 40s I created a new algorithm for finding the same, which is faster and more flexible. But in my 20s I worked a lot harder, which means I produced more code. And got burned out a couple of times.
If you measure performance by LOC, then I might agree with you. But did Linus Torvalds and John Carmack become worse once they got into their 30s? What of Don Knuth? And Guido van Rossum was born in 1956 making him over 30 when he started Python.
I think Guido has long since learned not to care about language debates on HN. ;)
Those who are successful in their careers in software become managers in their 30's and cease to take part in debates about languages, which accounts for their puerile tenor.
I'm nevertheless glad to see that you are still keeping an eye on things, Mr Dalke!