Don Hopkins - Tue, 23 Apr 2002 - 16:56:36-07:00

In the same way that Java was a reaction to the wicked corruption of C++,
PHP is merely a reaction to the wicked corruption of Perl.

PHP may seem like a good idea to someone who's only ever programmed in Perl
and is sick of suffering.
The same goes for Java: it only seems like a good idea when compared to C++,
without considering language like Lisp or Ruby.

Any language whose design is based on imitating another crippled language is 
at a disadvantage to a language that was well designed in the first place.

I understand the argument that all Turing complete programming languages are
equivalent in what they can compute.
But programming language design goes far beyond Turing completeness:
Language design is user interface design, because programmers are language
users.
Languages like Perl and C++ that ignore the important tenants of user
interface design are badly designed languages.

It's unethical to evangelize badly design languages, even if it's simply out
of ignorance, and especially if it's in the name of job security through
code obscurity.
The fact that somebody's invested years in learning C++ or Perl is no
justification for spreading the disease, when there are better and more
appropriate solutions available.

And to be correct, the JSTCO "post-support" strategy will never work at 
all. It will not help, after all.
The ones who do the hiring and firing often have no idea what it is you do 
other than "some computer stuff".
They gonna have no clue about how & why the whole system is going to crash 
a couple months after you were thrown down the drains.

    -Don
