On Wed, 2005-07-13 at 10:42 -0600, Bryan Sant wrote: > Ummmm... Thanks Mr. Graham. Yes, you're quite the authority on what > technology a company should use to maximize competitiveness.
You completely missed the point of Graham's comment. Technology matters much less than the quality of the people in a company. Choosing Java is easy. It's the "safe" choice. Java programmers spring from the earth like weeds. Choosing a language like Perl or Python requires a little more bravery. Because the company is accepting a larger "risk" it's an indication that the median quality of the programmers in a company is probably higher, or at least that the company has enough confidence to believe its employees are good enough to buck convention. Choosing Lisp is... gutsy. A company that chooses to use Lisp is accepting the fact that they'll have a pretty hard time finding qualified employees based on the assumption that those they do find will generally be of much higher caliber. At least where Lisp is concerned, that's probably a pretty safe assumption. -- Stuart Jansen e-mail/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] "XML is like violence: if it doesn't solve your problem, you aren't using enough of it." - Chris Maden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
.===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
