"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message news:iug1fa$14v6$1...@digitalmars.com... > "Adam Richardson" <simples...@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.1291.1309377741.14074.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote: >> >>> "James Fisher" <jameshfis...@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:mailman.1279.1309339361.14074.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >>> > >>> > I don't aim to proselytize one mini-language over another, as they're >>> much >>> > of a muchness. But I'd hope to convince people that: >>> > >>> > - Besides required functionality, the key reason to choose one >>> > markup/documentation/html-generating format is popularity. It opens >>> > up >>> > development to new users, frees up maintainers of old documentation >>> > generators, and gives you new tools to use for free. Markup formats >>> are >>> > one >>> > area where Might Is Right. >>> >>> Popularity should *never* be a significant concern. That's how we end up >>> with complete shit like PHP becoming widespread. >>> >> >> Easy :) While I wouldn't use PHP for systems programming, PHP is a solid >> tool for building websites. >> > > It's complete garbage for building websites.
And there isn't a single damn thing about PHP that's remotely "stable". > It's complete garbage for *everything*. And I've dealt with PHP and PHP > web apps a *lot*. I can't think of a single other web-oriented tool or > language that I wouldn't rather build a website with than PHP. Even > Classic-ASP with VBScript, absolutely horrid as it is, is at least a > somewhat *stable* target. >
