> ... , we don’t need novel software most of the time. We need better boring software. More general, less buggy, faster.
Doesn't producing that kind of software involve novel, interesting ideas in the first place?
Doesn't producing that kind of software involve novel, interesting ideas in the first place?
That leaves room for the software that actually does stuff to be boring.
These concepts are usually confused; even in the area of languages that supposedly you can't write bugs in, Haskell is too exciting in both directions (so it's too hard to use), but Ada/SPARK is too boring (so nobody wants to use it).