scsh-users
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)

To: scsh@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
From: Graham Matthews <graham.matthews@maths.anu.edu.au>
Date: Sat, 12 Apr 1997 10:51:31 +1000
Organization: Department of Mathematics, ANU
John Ousterhout wrote:
> OK, enough is enough.  I can see that I'm not going to be able to fool you
> guys.  I confess everything.  You're right.  It all *was* an evil
> conspiracy.  There really isn't a shred of merit in Tcl, or C++, or Perl,
> or C; there is not a single reason on earth why anyone should use any of
> these languages for any programming task.  Scheme truly is the perfect
> language that solves every problem and combines the virtues of every
> other language.  For years we've been plotting to trick programmers into
> using bad languages.  Yes, I mean "we".  Many many people have participated
> in this sinister plot, including Larry Wall, Dennis Ritchie, Bill Gates,
> the Bureau of ATF, most of the LAPD, and Mark Fuhrman (sorry you guys, but
> the truth has overwhelmed me so I've been forced to expose you).  I feel
> just terrible at how I have set the programming world back, and I promise
> to be a good boy from now on.

John you overplay your hand. Almost no-one has suggested that there is
no merit in Tcl. What they have suggested is that some of the merits
*you are claiming* are not true. That is a very different claim.

I would like you ask you a question. You claim that the "everything is a
string" approach is the be-all-and-end-all, the way to go, etc, etc. Why
then has Tcl8.0 moved away from this philosophy?

grahm

-- 
                         On the streets tonight
                         The innocent are dying
                        And the world's not right
                         So many millions dying

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>