Roy Smith wrote: > "Carl Banks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Imbed > > EMBED. > > My apologies for being sloppy. And with an initial capital, so it just > jumps off the page at you :-)
Ok. Prescriptive language isn't normally my cup of tea, but there's always something. And usually it's very silly. > > > Python, or Perl, or TCL, or Ruby, or PHP, > > > > Not PHP. PHP is one of the better (meaning less terrible) examples of > > what happens when you do this sort of thing, which is not saying a lot. > > But, that's exactly my point. To be honest, I've never used PHP. But > however bad it may be, at least it's got a few years of people fixing > bugs, writing books, writing add-on tools, etc, behind it. Better to > use somebody else's well-known and well-supported mess of a scripting > language than to invest several person-years inventing your own mess > that's no better. Well, if you look at it that way, I guess so. My mindset was closer to "hacked-up quasi-languages are evil" than "hacked-up quasi-languages are not worth the time to implement when there are plenty of hacked-up quasi-languages already out there, not to mention some real languages." -- CARL BANKS -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
