Yes, it's "source goes in, magic out", but still constrained to a specific context. The type of magic that comes out, while very cool and very vast, is still a small subset of the magic that can come out of something more general-purpose.
I don't understand why it's gatekeeping to acknowledge this distinction. I don't agree that calling something "not a programming language" makes it "lesser than a programming language", but just helps us understand in more specific terms what the tool is and isn't. Why is using multiple categories of language when we talk about our tools dismissive?
I agree - good categorization of the languages we have is important.
I think the real problem is when people think or act as if they are superior to others because they know a certain language or category of languages and others don't.
I agree, but I think it’s more truer that markup languages are a subset of programming language vs a different category.
And in this case I think the gatekeeping comes into play when the topic of whether or not these things are programming languages is somewhat unimportant.
So whether the answer is yes or no, pointing it out when it’s unneeded for the conversation is gatekeeping, or could be perceived that way in our imperfect online lack of tone translation.
In a sense, the true gatekeepers have ruined it for anyone coming in with good intentions.
it’s more truer that markup languages are a subset of programming language vs a different category.
The rest of this thread has me convinced of this as well now.
pointing it out when it’s unneeded for the conversation is gatekeeping
I agree, but in this case it was the conversation! You've got a point, though, the people with emotions about this sort of thing aren't usually coming to these discussions in good faith but for some sort of one-upmanship. At the end of the day, of course it doesn't actually matter - just build things. I still think it's useful to classify languages like this, in the interest of making well-informed choices about the right tool for the right job, but that sentence is so uncontroversial I don't imagine anyone disagrees.
Thanks for your response!
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Yes, it's "source goes in, magic out", but still constrained to a specific context. The type of magic that comes out, while very cool and very vast, is still a small subset of the magic that can come out of something more general-purpose.
I don't understand why it's gatekeeping to acknowledge this distinction. I don't agree that calling something "not a programming language" makes it "lesser than a programming language", but just helps us understand in more specific terms what the tool is and isn't. Why is using multiple categories of language when we talk about our tools dismissive?
I agree - good categorization of the languages we have is important.
I think the real problem is when people think or act as if they are superior to others because they know a certain language or category of languages and others don't.
Of course - those people don't tend to be worth your time anyway.
I agree, but I think it’s more truer that markup languages are a subset of programming language vs a different category.
And in this case I think the gatekeeping comes into play when the topic of whether or not these things are programming languages is somewhat unimportant.
So whether the answer is yes or no, pointing it out when it’s unneeded for the conversation is gatekeeping, or could be perceived that way in our imperfect online lack of tone translation.
In a sense, the true gatekeepers have ruined it for anyone coming in with good intentions.
The rest of this thread has me convinced of this as well now.
I agree, but in this case it was the conversation! You've got a point, though, the people with emotions about this sort of thing aren't usually coming to these discussions in good faith but for some sort of one-upmanship. At the end of the day, of course it doesn't actually matter - just build things. I still think it's useful to classify languages like this, in the interest of making well-informed choices about the right tool for the right job, but that sentence is so uncontroversial I don't imagine anyone disagrees.
Thanks for your response!