jos@cs.vu.nl (Jos Warmer) (06/08/89)
mbenveni@irisa.irisa.fr (benveniste marc,lsp) writes: > Although It may sound anachronistic and/or idealistic, I believe that >programming languages should be chosen based on criteria such as security >(in its wider sense), reliability, extensibility, readability etc. rather >than by its marketing advantage or upwards compatibility with widespread >traditions. > We surely don't want to reinvent the wheel, but we can't let an inadequate >component flaw a design just because everybody likes it and works with it; >we would be trapped in a vicious circle. This is wishfull thinking. These kind of choices are almost *never* made on the right criteria. People tend to be very conservative. Jos Warmer jos@cs.vu.nl ...uunet!mcvax!cs.vu.nl!jos -- Jos Warmer jos@cs.vu.nl ...uunet!mcvax!cs.vu.nl!jos
seindal@skinfaxe.diku.dk (Rene' Seindal) (06/16/89)
david@cullsj.UUCP (David Taylor) writes: > In article <111@dbase.UUCP>, awd@dbase.UUCP (Alastair Dallas) writes: > > In article <1989Jun13.084057.2032@LTH.Se>, newsuser@LTH.Se (LTH network news server) writes: > > > > > > I do not like the current ``discussion'' between Bertrand Meyer and > > > Bjarne Stroustrup. I think it was wrong to start it, and I think... > > > > I disagree. Yes, no one else on the net has anything but opinion to add to > > the discussion and the debate is more personal than factual. By some limited > etc. > I like this. > An argument over whether to have arguments. > Are we plagiarizing Monty Python sketches here? L e m o n C u r r y !