What Phil Hagelberg thinks about developer tools

@phil-hagelberg · 16 positions · On ppll ↗

Programmer known online as technomancy; author of Leiningen, the Clojure build tool, and a maintainer of the Fennel programming language.

Phil Hagelberg did not write this page.

We collected these quotes from things they published elsewhere, and every quote links to where it was said. They have no account here and have not endorsed this site. Quotes are word for word; the short line under each one is our own restatement, not their wording. Their own site. Is this you? Claim it or ask us to remove it. Or tell us what is wrong here.

Filter developer tools · Newest first

Topic

All 16design 3developer tools 3JavaScript 2open source 2privacy 2software quality 2America 1behavioural science 1capitalism 1

6 more topics

compilers 1cybersecurity 1government 1Linux 1SaaS 1social media 1

Sort

NewestOldest

Only Phil Hagelberg on developer tools. See everyone on developer tools

3 dated positions, 2023 to 2026, in their own words. Our reading of what Phil Hagelberg has said — not written or endorsed by them.

3 positions so far — this page is not yet offered to search engines.

1. 25 Apr 2026

   Our readingReplacing a monopolistic platform with a single alternative isn't enough — real resilience requires diversity among competing platforms.

   Their wordsWe shouldn't replace Github with one site at all; we need the strength and resilience that only comes with diversity

   ↗in which more paths are charted towards code independencetechnomancy.us 1st of 3 in this piece

2. 2 years earlier

3. 31 Dec 2023

   Our readingMetaprogramming in a language creates fundamental obstacles to static analysis of its code.

   Their wordsLanguages with metaprogramming tend to put up fundamental hurdles to static analysis

   ↗in which an escape route is discoveredtechnomancy.us 1st of 3 in this piece

5. 31 Dec 2023

   Our readingMost macros just transform their arguments, so running them during static analysis is usually safe even though it can't be guaranteed.

   Their wordsmost macros don't actually do anything other than pure transformation of their arguments. It's almost always safe to run them during static analysis, except you don't know for sure

   ↗in which an escape route is discoveredtechnomancy.us 2nd of 3 in this piece