> Can you imagine programming without immutability?
Yes.
Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of immutable data and think it is often the best approach. But I also think it is far from the default in many production systems. If you cannot imagine programming without it, it is possible that you may be working in a (wonderful, functional) bubble.
Context- I very clearly remember arriving at the benefits of the idea of immutability long before Clojure but I didn't have the word immutability or a hook in the public discourse to connect it to. There were of course related concepts and projects from the late 1990s and early 2000s- idempotent operations in HTTP, log-based file systems, packaging systems like NixOS, some PL papers- but prior to Rich's early popularity I remember difficulties on various projects in explaining this approach to those for whom it was a new idea.
I feel like shortly after Clojure and Rich's talks, the idea- the term "immutability"- achieved R > 1 spread and it quickly became a default design principle.
So the point would be better stated- can you imagine (or remember) when you didn't have the term immutability to refer in shorthand to?
Yes.
Don't get me wrong; I'm a big fan of immutable data and think it is often the best approach. But I also think it is far from the default in many production systems. If you cannot imagine programming without it, it is possible that you may be working in a (wonderful, functional) bubble.