It is a whodunit. Those movies are designed for you to obsess over every detail to figure out who actually committed the murder. Just consider the suspects' phones as extra clues that could prove to be either vital in solving the crime or a complete red herring.
Then why is it so common for people to try and select a subset of the language. Arguing about what people should do is pointless, you have to look at what they do do.
If there are multiple ways of achieving the same result (e.g. assignment) and you want to be consistent, you have to choose a subset. If there are features that time has shown to be less-than-ideal (e.g. malloc/free) you choose a subset while the language avoids removing breaking backwards-compatibility.
So when you go to another project that made different decisions, what you should do is understand the decisions. It's quite easy. And that's why it's what people do do, and it's why people are capable of contributing to projects other than their first.
If you program in C++, it's the same skill you used to learn one or more of {CMake, Makefiles, scons, bash, python} except it's easier because you already understand the programming language's model.
Much as I didn't mean to insult anyone with my post, I'm sure you meant to add value by calling it petty and fallacious.
Picking up features in a language you already use is easier than learning the language to begin with which itself is easier than learning to program at all. If you were able to read the documentation to get to 50%, you have all the skills needed to pick up the rest and get to the difficult part of picking up a new project: understanding the problem space. If you're capable of learning the meaning of an API you've never seen before - and you will, if you're not writing your last project verbatim - then you're capable of learning what a lambda means. This is not me saying that all programmers should be able to do this, it's me saying that doing this is a predicate of engineering software.
Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style to HN? You've been doing it a lot lately, and it's really not what this site is for. What we want here is curious conversation, which generally requires stepping away from the keyboard when feeling provoked, even if other people are doing or saying bad things.
>I always thought the only way forward with IoT was if it a big tech player offered an SDK / IoT platform that allowed developers to focus on the widgety part of their widget without having to think about the complexities of running an internet connected device.
You would be amazed how many of the big players are doing exactly that. But I shouldn't talk about it any more, I work for one.
But we're not intuitively familiar with what happens when those stars get really big and start being black holes and exhibiting relativity. Fortunately, like waves, we can manage the maths.
