Brian van den Broek wrote:
And you, sir, must be, like, one of those Nazi type people,Peter Hansen said unto the world upon 2004-12-15 17:39:
I could easily see this thread descending into a flame war in, oh, about another ten posts. That would be so freaky...
Without a doubt that is the most ignorant and small-minded thought that ever has been, and ever could be, committed to words!
like that guy, uh, what was his name? er.. Godwood, Goodwin, something
like that, anyway. (Hey, Jive, you happy yet?)
Object oriented programming SUX! And Python too!
It's slow and no scientific research exists in its favor! Also it doesn't work. Why would I need polymorphism? Lisp had all of this 50 years ago anyway. But functional programming by the way SUX TOO! So does procedural programming! And structured programming SUX, GOTO all the way!
Oh, and Vi SUX, Emacs all the way. Emacs Lisp SUX though. Java is the only true object oriented language, so Python is not truly object oriented and it's slow anyway. The future will be to .NET. Oh and XML sucks! Python developers are above XML! And why doesn't Python have a web framework like Ruby on Rails? Python has way too many web frameworks, that SUX! And oh by the way, Ruby SUX!
Perl is way superior to Python as it outperforms it and it's more readable. Indentation SUX! Depending on it is Barbaric, which is like Cobol, which by the way, ROCKS!
The decorator syntax SUX! Why didn't they just use the ternary operator syntax for it?? Oh, and Python really went downhill since version 1.5.2!
Python will not be a mature language if it doesn't add UNSIGNED INT, SIGNED LONG and FLOAT to the language as basic data types. Oh, and any language that doesn't have True Macros SUX.
Guido von Rossam is ITALIAN! And he SUX! I SUX TOO BUT I WILL NEVER ADMIT TO IT EVER IN THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION, I will answer ANY argument indicating that my arguments are fallacious and my behavior unreasonable with the TRUTH, which is that you SUX.
Hah!
Martijn -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
