It doesn't even have to be related to quality of developers. Whatever tool chain or product you use, you're using someone else's dependencies. In some places more than others, but most people aren't implementing their own matrix multiplication code, and the ones that are, aren't implementing random library #24 which isn't in their core business. So this whole discussion happens on black and white terms when in fact people only care if they have regulatory obligations, or they have a particular personal interest in implementing something, or they got attached to that idea for a specific library. But nobody is applying this fully or they'd still be at the beach collecting sand.
We apply this pretty much fully at TigerBeetle [1].
Reason being that TigerStyle is not only about shipping safer software, but shipping it in less time [2], factoring in the Total Cost of Ownership to end users. In other words, not only optimizing our development time, but also all the time spent in production with subsequent fixes.
Vasco! In a past life I've implemented (and tuned) things like Cauchy by hand, but we don't use any of that in TigerBeetle. Nevertheless, the experiences and learnings around that were valuable for me personally, and I don't think I'd have been able to do TigerBeetle without putting in those hours. Wish you all the best, man!
> But nobody is applying this fully or they'd still be at the beach collecting sand.
To this point I posit almost all of the "this good, that bad" type of posts are just "at my point on the abstraction continuum, this thing is better than that thing" without taking into account any context.
For most assembly is too low level for their context/use case, but for some, the C programming language is too HIGH level, as it was originally designed to be (but not for me).
