Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:01:40 +0100 (CET)
From: Karel Gardas <kgardas@objectsecurity.com>
To: Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: darcs vs tla
In-Reply-To: <20041111144939.GA11489@suffields.me.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0411111559360.746-100000@thinkpad.gardas.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
Precedence: list
Sender: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Errors-To: gnu-arch-users-bounces+migo=homemail.com@gnu.org
Status: RO
Content-Length: 1398
Lines: 36
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Andrew Suffield wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 03:43:14PM +0100, Karel Gardas wrote:
> > > I am willing to accept as a hypothesis that some languages may be
> > > faster to write than others, but there is no more than circumstancial
> > > evidence in both directions. Furthermore without a way to quantify the
> > > skill of a programmer in a given language, in a manner comparable to
> > > the skill of a different programmer in a different language, I don't
> > > think it is possible to have real evidence either way. So you won't
> > > really get much mileage out of it.
> >
> > the simple evidence is whole IT industry, especially focusing on bussiness
> > oriented systems. Don't you see all these projects slowly migrating from C
> > to C++, from C++ to Java or even to VisualBasic/Python?
> > The truth is simple, highler-level languages are more easier to be used,
> > more quickly to be written than such double-edged knife like C/C++.
>
> Please try thinking before sending mail.

I had. Where I did mistake?

Thanks,
Karel
--
Karel Gardas                  kgardas@objectsecurity.com
ObjectSecurity Ltd.           http://www.objectsecurity.com


_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
Gnu-arch-users@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/