On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:44:24 +0200
Jiří Techet wrote:
> > And you program in C++ !! I'd have thought overriding some entries
> > only would be easy to understand :-)
>
> Yes, but I didn't say I like C++ - I don't. The language is made in a
> completely wrong way. Unfortunately the fact is that i
On 10 June 2010 21:03, Nick Treleaven wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:44:24 +0200
> Jiří Techet wrote:
>
>> > And you program in C++ !! I'd have thought overriding some entries
>> > only would be easy to understand :-)
>>
>> Yes, but I didn't say I like C++ - I don't. The language is made in a
>>
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 23:23:21 +1000
Lex Trotman wrote:
> > Go is not a good replacement for C++, try D. Some people say Go is a
> > good replacement for C.
>
> And some people say that it has sadly made some decisions that prevent
> it being that, but with Google behind it it may succeed anyway,
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 15:23, Lex Trotman wrote:
> On 10 June 2010 21:03, Nick Treleaven wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:44:24 +0200
>> Jiří Techet wrote:
>>
>>> > And you program in C++ !! I'd have thought overriding some entries
>>> > only would be easy to understand :-)
>>>
>>> Yes, but I d
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:28:42 +0200
Jiří Techet wrote:
> >> Go is not a good replacement for C++, try D. Some people say Go is a
> >> good replacement for C.
> >
> > And some people say that it has sadly made some decisions that prevent
> > it being that, but with Google behind it it may succeed a
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 17:25, Nick Treleaven
wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:28:42 +0200
> Jiří Techet wrote:
>
>> >> Go is not a good replacement for C++, try D. Some people say Go is a
>> >> good replacement for C.
>> >
>> > And some people say that it has sadly made some decisions that preven
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:48:39 +0200
Jiří Techet wrote:
> > I agree it helps, but are there really no successful widespread
> > languages that didn't have corporate backing?
> >
>
> Unfortunately we're not living in the 70's or 80's, where the best had
> a chance, and there's a lot of software wri
On 11 June 2010 02:15, Nick Treleaven wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:48:39 +0200
> Jiří Techet wrote:
>
>> > I agree it helps, but are there really no successful widespread
>> > languages that didn't have corporate backing?
>> >
If success = widespread use then python and php?
>>
>> Unfortunat
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 00:17, Lex Trotman wrote:
> On 11 June 2010 02:15, Nick Treleaven wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:48:39 +0200
>> Jiří Techet wrote:
>>
>>> > I agree it helps, but are there really no successful widespread
>>> > languages that didn't have corporate backing?
>>> >
>
> If s
On 11 June 2010 09:37, Jiří Techet wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 00:17, Lex Trotman wrote:
>> On 11 June 2010 02:15, Nick Treleaven wrote:
>>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 17:48:39 +0200
>>> Jiří Techet wrote:
>>>
> I agree it helps, but are there really no successful widespread
> languages
10 matches
Mail list logo
