From: kate rhodes <masukomi@...>
Date: 2006-05-04T05:36:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Sharp knives and glue

------=_Part_349_3966818.1146688606564
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

>Sorry to go off on you, but your argument is the same argument that people
>used to claim that C++ was better because developers managed memory rather
>than having the machine manage memory.  Machines are better than developer=
s
>at managing memory.  Machines are better than humans at enforcing rules.

I don't see your post as going off on me at all. I think you're making
pretty much exactly the same point i did in both of my posts...only more
verbosely.

As- i said
> the question at hand is should undiciplined, or just poor
> quality, programmers be handed a language as dynamic and flexible as Ruby
> or something that limits their ability/options to do stupid things, like
Java
> or Ada?

Java and Ada just have more "guard rails" as you put it. I never claimed an=
y
language was "better" or the right choice. But i did claim that using a
language with more restrictions was probably a better choice for less
disciplined/experienced/good developers, which it seems you did too.

-Kate

------=_Part_349_3966818.1146688606564--