At 06:47 +1200 2001.03.18, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>Chris Nandor wrote:
>> Eh. His generalizations about what is good for what aside, his only
>> specific complaints against Perl / arguments for Python boil down to "I
>> like it better, and so do other people I agree with."
>
>That's the only valid argument one way or the other, as far as I'm concerned.
Perhaps. But it's a bit disingenuous to frame it as though Python is
better in some objective way, and then have no evidence to show for it.
It's annoying. He does not even attempt to prove his incredible statement
that "Python is used pretty much across the board, much more across the
board than Perl," providing a small handful of well-known examples, for
each of which there dozens of counterexamples.
In other words, he should have just said "I like Python better and so do
people who agree with me" instead of trying to make some unbelievable case.
It damages his credibility, at the very least, and just enflames the
advocates of each language (which is, I'd believe, the probable purpose).
--
Chris Nandor [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pudge.net/
Open Source Development Network [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://osdn.com/
