On 28 March 2011 09:59, Bruce Chapman <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 28/03/2011 2:33 p.m., Kevin Wright wrote:
>
>>
>> JVM platform?  Not so... only one language there suffers checked
>> exceptions.  The platform overall is a Good Thing(tm)
>>
>
> Languages aren't sentient so they don't suffer. A few people (who are
> sentient) appear to suffer checked exceptions, those people seem to be far
> more aware than I, of myriad alternatives languages where they could go to
> avoid their suffering - yet they continue to suffer and bemoan their
> suffering (there is some implicit suffering amongst the bemoanees here)
> rather than moving away.
>
> I don't understand their suffering, and I don't understand why they don't
> move.
>
>
You can move language, but still remain on the Java platform.  That was kind
of my point...


>
>
> --
> 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.
>
>


-- 
Kevin Wright

gtalk / msn : [email protected]
<[email protected]>mail: [email protected]
vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright
quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright
twitter: @thecoda

"My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not
regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current
conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side of
the ledger" ~ Dijkstra

-- 
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.

Reply via email to