From: Tim Hammerquist Date: 2005-12-25T09:02:52+09:00 Subject: Re: Bruce Eckel and Ruby Martin Fowler wrote: > I wrote: > > But examining an arguers potential motives is a key tool for > > rebuttal, just as one might examine a certain politician's ties > > to the petroleum industry to explain his motives in foreign > > affairs. > > The problem is that it's too easy to make up your own > assumptions about peoples' motives, and nobody's offering > software book authors the kind of money that politicians get. > > I know Bruce moderately, well enough to be pretty damn sure > that monetary motives are well below his radar (for goodness > sake he makes his books available free on the internet, which > is more than I've ever had courage to do.) People are very > quick to slam other people's integrity on the internet. > Bruce's skin has probably thickened in time, but it still > hurts me when it happens to me, so I feel inclined to defend > him. I've always had the impression that this kind of thing > happens rarely in the ruby community, I would wish that to be > true. I know Bruce not at all, and have read only one book (TiCPP). I don't personally believe that greed is his goal in this matter. I do believe his opinions on !python are biased in favor of python, though I do not fault him for it, as my opinions on *many* things are likewise biased, and I can do little to prevent it at times. I think it much more likely that it is one of the two following issues: (a) he is, either consciously or subconsciously, rejecting !python because he is enamored of python, or (b) he simply believes that python is better. I see no fault either way. My post merely defended the act of examining motives beyond simple preference. That in this case it falls to preference rather than personal gain is probably more a symptom of the religious aspect of language preference, and not the invalidity of motive. Anyway, that was probably too verbose, but I'm late for dinner. Sorry I can't edit it down more. Cheers! Tim Hammerquist