wut
On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 3:12 PM, erik quanstrom <quans...@quanstro.net> wrote:
> On Sun Oct 9 02:16:11 EDT 2011, pmarin.m...@gmail.com wrote:
>> In 15 years Tcl has been improved a lot, like any other language.
>
> that might not be relevant to ron's point. i think this is almost
> a geometry problem. if you plot languages in 1997 and late 2011 on the
> "goodness line", it should follow that improving isn't enough to have
> a sufficiently large "goodness factor". the language in question has to
> be improving fast enough relative to the competition to be in the top
> bunch (largest x). if you only plot languages similar to tcl on this line,
> i think you get the same result.
>
> in tcl's case, the segment between starting point and today would seem
> to need to be prohibitively long. (although python made the minimum
> segment length much shorter by making python 3 incompatable with 2.)
>
> - erik
>
>
