In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
.
.
.
>It would have been nice to put in a blurb for some of the cool stuff
>planned for 8.5. That way people could see that things are *happening*
>in the Tcl world and Tcl is moving forward language wise.
>
>That doesn't take away from the article though. It was just a thought.
.
.
.
Robert, though "just a thought", I want to say a few words in response:
you're wrong. Or, you're ambiguous: I think you're saying, "To appro-
priately infect readers with the enthusiasm for Tcl that you (and I)
think they deserve to have, it is necessary to anticipate the objection
that Tcl is 'dormant' and convince them otherwise."
Here's the problem: a magazine needs to be written for its readers,
rather than its authors or any other actors (from a business stand-
point, content ultimately is designed to serve advertisers, but that
rather dreary reality is a distraction we'll ignore for now). Lynn's
job was to profile the languages. To keep her scope manageable, she
did not address the cultures of the different languages. As I under-
stand her thoughts, she doesn't try to help the languages, but rather
help the readers.
It feels as though I'm hitting this tack of a point with a too-heavy
sledgehammer. I sure don't want to offend you, Robert; I *do* want
to take the opportunity to distinguish the different motivations afoot
here. While I think you already understand this, I'll make it explicit:
Lynn deserves our encouragement for her openness to ideas like use of
scripting languages, not our censure for failing to go far enough.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
