On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
wrote:
Problem is, that's irrelevant: The important point he's missing
is
"If feature X is helpful, then why should I *bother* going
without, when there are plenty of other languages (such as the
one I'm
already using) that *do* provide me with that benefit?"
He fails to even *try* to answer that and instead just
complains about
complaining.
The answer to that question is obvious: you should bother going
without because other languages provide other things that your
pet language does not (e.g. channels + simplicity in this case).
Searching for a better language is a search like any other.
Hill-climbing is a poor search heuristic. Sometimes you have to
be willing to lose features to find the higher peaks.
