On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 at 10:12 -0700, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > This is the standard argument used to defend stuff that sucks. Yes, all > languages are turing complete. Nevertheless, > > - some languages are better for specific purposes (e.g. erlang and > concurrency) > - some languages are better generalists than others, too > > Perl is a good awk + sed replacement. The problem is when people start > using it as a generalist language because they don't know better.
Which, while I'm in the strange mood to defend languages I don't care about, is why people shouldn't bash Java so much. Java actually does fit the bill in some situations. It just so happens that most of us on this list like to at least dream of writing open source, and most of us do write code in small agile teams (if at all). Java isn't a very wise choice (IMHO) for either situation. -- .O. Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. ..O http://hans.fugal.net | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg OOO | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach --------------------------------------------------------------------- GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.-----------------------------------. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `-----------------------------------'
