Subject: Re: Injecting some sense into the C++ vs. Lisp debate From: Erik Naggum <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: 2000/07/19 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <email@example.com> * Googleplexation is NOT an option! <firstname.lastname@example.org> | Some of the other major problems that crop up when comparing languages | are: | 1. Disparity of experience: Comparing code written by a good | programmer with code written by a poor programmer in another | language. | 2. Selective examples: Chosen examples that guarantee one language | looks better than another. Its hard to find language-neutral | examples. | 3. Confusing language clarity with code performance. You may be | more productive in one language than another, and be able to express | code more clearly, but that is a whole other issue. | 4. Human nature. These are all very fine ad hominem arguments against language comparisons as such, but do you have anything that could be used to determine whether these fine arguments do not apply to a particular language comparison? That is, in your view, is a comparison of languages possible or do you _always_ interpret a comparison of languages as suffering from these problems? #:Erik -- If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.