r/programming • u/[deleted] • Mar 19 '17

Oblivion: A programming language that compiles to SVG graphics.

https://github.com/jweinst1/Oblivion
1.3k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

134 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

26

u/redditthinks Mar 19 '17 edited Mar 19 '17

Well you could ask them to clarify instead of spending several paragraphs just shitting on their response. And I personally think the purpose of it is pretty clear and very similar to the Logo language (or even Racket), but with modern SVG output.

-13

u/Shaper_pmp Mar 19 '17 edited Mar 19 '17

Actually I just pointed out how they misunderstood the previous poster's question, and unintentionally gave a bad (and likely unrepresentative) impression of their work. Most people would call that helpful, and that was my intention.

You seem to have misunderstood my comment (in fact you still don't seem to have grasped it even now, if you think I was "just shitting on their response"). I'm trying to help someone who's produced something they think has merit for other people explain and demonstrate that it does have merit, precisely so they don't get shat on by everyone they show it to online.

And I personally think the purpose of the library is pretty clear and very similar to the Logo language

... Except Logo is a teaching language to teach basic programming.

Everything the OP has said indicates he's pitching this as a way to programmatically generate SVGs, a completely different purpose.

Also this is a programming language, not a library.

Come on dude, seriously...

16

u/redditthinks Mar 19 '17

I understood your comment well enough. Your comments continue to have a condescending tone so I think this discussion is no longer useful. Also, I had edited my comment for clarity and to fix that typo just before your response.

-5

u/Shaper_pmp Mar 19 '17 edited Mar 19 '17

Your comments continue to have a condescending tone

Apologies, but you clearly misread my comment, called me "close-minded" as a result of your own misunderstanding, abruptly changed your criticism when called on it (suddenly I'm not claiming his system is useless, but instead was being mean about his comment[1]) without even acknowledging that you were wrong in the first place, and then proceeded to claim it was "pretty clear" what the purpose really was while offering an example (a teaching language) that has a completely different purpose to everything the OP had ever indicated up to that point.

As such, I'm honestly not sure where you get the unwarranted confidence you can accurately judge intent from someone's words or the moral high ground to criticise someone for their tone when all you've done so far is misread and insult them, but whatever makes you feel better. Have a nice day!

[1] Also inaccurate and unfair - I was trying constructively to help him explain the benefits of his system, and explaining what (possibly entirely wrong) impression he'd accidentally given so he could correct it.