Luckily, not everybody thinks as you do. If everybody waited for new technogies to be proven by market, no new technologies would ever be proven by market. There have to be early adopters to bootstrap any technology. Please don't discurage them, just because you aren't one them.
| [reply] |
Please don't discourage them, just because you aren't one them
I don't think he will discourage them.
Quite the opposite.
You see, sundialsvc4
is the opposite of
a key influencer.
I'm struggling to come up with a term for that,
perhaps “cheesy inhibitor”
— full of ‘cheap’
stylistic←devices,
flow–ery →analogies© and
“´old bull-shitter´® ‘logic’”™¡¿?!
… yet ultimately superficial and unconvincing.
Update: Instead of "cheesy",
perhaps a word starting with i sounds better, for example:
"insignificant, ignominious, inept, irrelevant inhibitor".
Other alternative adjectives: gormless, fatuous,
puerile, pointless, puny, pathetic, pitiful.
| [reply] |
| [reply] |
Frankly, I wouldn’t worry too much about porting anything to Perl6 ... or to any of its many acronyms ... unless and until it is clearly demonstrated, by market forces, that this language is actually “commercially viable.”
You are deadly wrong. If all human beings behaved by your standards, fire and the wheel would still need to be invented. And, of course, we would not be talking on the Internet. Fortunately, there are some people who are willing to work for free.
Now, it seems, based on your comments, that you haven't understood anything about open source and free software.
But this is what Perl is about.
| [reply] |
In saying such a thing, I am not endeavoring to be controversial, nor to push anyone's buttons.
Yes, yes you are. Because otherwise - and I don't believe this to be the case - it would mean you have absolutely no clue about open source software.
| [reply] |
