On 28-Oct-07, at 2:32 AM, Michael Davies wrote:

> There's an interesting post and discussion here:
> http://weblog.raganwald.com/2007/10/too-much-of-good-thing-not- 
> all.html

Actually I think it is 95% bullshit. It reads like it is trying to  
make excuses for the poor quality of java.

And that apparent quoting of Alan is not one I am familiar with - and  
I'm fairly sure I was there when he made the comment about C++ not  
being what he had in mind. I certainly can't find any net source for  
this 'full' quote.

I did come acros some astonishing rubbish while searching for it  
though, including what looks like a Ruby hagiography where some dimwit  
appears to be claiming
"Why do I have to put the thing even Smalltalk abandoned (leaving
illusion though) in Ruby? They are ugly too, I think. -- matz
on Smalltalk often control structure being object is mere illusion in  
most
Smalltalk implementation "

Which is such a piece of crapulent cockamamie confabulabulatory  
contrariness I'm amazed the net didn't reach out through the writer's  
browser and strangle him/her to save the rest of us frim his/her  
wisdumb.


tim
--
tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what  
you are talking about.