"Peter Alexander" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On 15/11/11 7:30 PM, Timon Gehr wrote: >> On 11/15/2011 05:13 PM, Jeff Nowakowski wrote: >>> He also said: "+1. Gets us rid of the buzzy 'Multi-paradigm' in the >>> title too." He's obviously against it, but was willing to let it slide. >>> >> >> Well, I am not strictly against it. It is as I wrote in that other post, >> if we can find a better, maybe more discriminating, term, that would be >> nice. I like the 'modelling power' proposal too. > > To me, multi-paradigm is another way of saying "not dogmatic", i.e. you > aren't forced into a single paradigm. > > Perhaps a better way to say it would simply be "Pragmatic"? > > I think the fact that D's development is based on years of experience > rather than academic ideals, like orthogonality, is very much understated > on the new page.
"Pragmatic" is always the term I think of as a one-word description of D.
