On Jul 12, 11:51 am, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry Vince, but, your argument is complete bollocks: > > Because there isn't yet a programming language which, by the way, is > mathematically provably impossible to create, java and COBOL are > equal. > > (Vince said he wanted a language which, given that you define inputs > and expected outputs, writes the program for you).
The reason I say that Java and COBOL are equal is that I, personally, am working at the same level of detail in problem solving that I was thirty years ago. A lot has happened around me and the tools that I work with are shinier than they've ever been but I'd still be hard pushed to say what is different, interlectually, about what I do now compared with with I did 1985. In that respect, there has been little to no progress in software development during the whole of my career. For instance, in the mid-80s I was laying out text boxes and labels on IBM green screens using some long forgotten software. In the mid-90s it was VB. Then can Swing (if anything, a retrograde step) and now I'm using JSF 2.0. Technically, each one is better than before. Personally, I'm experimenting with layouts, chosing colours in hexadecimal and counting pixels. Personally, nothing has changed. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
