> no need to get all touchy-feely about this.
> > Perl is popular so it must have some merit. > So is Crack. I still won't smoke it, though. > > I don't subscribe to the > > flawed reasoning that Perl Hackers just don't know any better or that > > they are dumb, or intellectual inferior in some way. > most Perl Hackers, those who voluntarily use it > to solve actual problem, *are* in fact dumb, don't want to know any > better and are resistant to education. > If you want to argue, ask Google for Erik Naggum; nothing > more needs to be said about it. > I *choose* to belittle Perl Hackers as much as I want. If that > stops anyone from using Perl, it's their *choice*. And you can *choose* > to hate me for belittling you, jackass. Ummm... Udo? Just what the fuck did you hope to accomplish with this kind of talk? Seriously, if you're channeling Erik Naggum, please stop. One socially-maladjusted-to-the-point-of-psychosis individual as a language advocate is more than enough. It's likely two too many, in fact. Reply as you see fit to bolster your ego. -- Michael T. Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (GoogleTalk: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) I can see computers everywhere - except in the productivity statistics! (Robert Solow)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
