it's incredible that that project has 11,000 commits, a huge amount of effort has gone into it but the code is really unpleasant to read. I feel like I must be missing something about FOAM - who is using it and why?
The success of an endeavor is proportional to the number of shitty hacks that have come before it. Sometimes this it true in a literal sense -- sometimes a project consists of shitty hacks. But the astute reader will notice that a hack is only known to be shitty because someone did it, and had the courage to make their example public.
Do we reward their courage? No. We act like cliquish teenagers and rip them apart.
I don't mean to single you out. But this subthread consists of a developer at Amazon, an unknown, and a founder -- the very types of people I wanted to respect -- yet the content is little more than "Look at how stupid these people are." What kind of example are we setting here?
Be excited about X! Whether X is FOAM, Javascript, COBOL, C++, Python, Erlang, Scheme, NPM, ASDF, Vim, Stallman, or a song. Be happy. Be amused. Be anything but bitter.
In this instance, FOAM shows what's possible. Is it necessarily a good idea? Who cares! We've learned something new! Be excited!
How certain are you that an idea that strikes you as bad is actually bad? For every possible circumstance? What about with a slight tweak? In fact, "An idea that seems bad" is the short definition of "startup."
Most ideas that seem bad are, in fact, bad. But it's important to fully explore the problem space before dismissing them, else you'll dismiss Facebook.
This subthread is about a software technique, not a startup idea. But is it really such a different domain? Would the idea of Python have survived if it had been introduced in the era of Multics? It wasn't a compiled language, so it couldn't hope to survive back then. Yet its time was coming, whether or not it would have been dismissed at the time.
"Under what circumstances could this be a good idea?" That's the valuable question. And if you also have a good answer to "Why now?" then you may be onto something. In fact, you might be one of the first people to notice that an idea has flipped from bad to good. Seems like a pretty powerful position.
It seems like most influential work started as a hack. (TeX is a notable exception.) So if you want to do influential work, be delighted by hacks. It'll make them easier to explore, and you might end up in a position few others realize is valuable.
Most everyone agrees with you in general about the usefulness of "trashing other people's work", but I think your response here is disproportionate to the circumstance.
For what it's worth I was asking a genuine question, most experimental projects don't get 11k commits so I assume that people are actively using it - my question is, given the plethora of alternatives available, what is it about FOAM that leads people to use it?
I shouldn't have said that the code was unpleasant, which is obviously subjective, but I should have said "the code style is quite unusual for JS", which it is. It was certainly not my intention to "trash their work".
