Subject: Re: New Lisp ? From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:10:18 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Nils Kassube <email@example.com> | Still the probability of finding a replacement for a Java programmer is | an order of magnitude (probably a lot more) better than finding a | replacement for a CL wizard. So it's a valid concern for businesses to | evaluate if it's smarter to hire a bunch of mediocre Java programmers or | a few clever CL developers. The situation is not Java vs CL, but mediocre vs wizard. CL programmers who want to work for money have to be _good_, as they stand on their own. Java programmers can be amazingly incompetent and ignorant and still get jobs, because they rely on so many others around them. The problem may be that it is hard to find CL mediocrities and Java wizards alike, so for one who hires Java mediocrities, the fact that it may be easier to find a CL wizard than a Java wizard is unimportant, because he is only looking for CL mediocrities when he does not know anything else. In particular, it is hard for someone who hires programmers by the truckload to believe that one CL wizard can do the work of at least 10 Java men. /// -- The past is not more important than the future, despite what your culture has taught you. Your future observations, conclusions, and beliefs are more important to you than those in your past ever will be. The world is changing so fast the balance between the past and the future has shifted.