3 ms·
>This goes for anything that's old. But that does not equate to 'good', it's just old. Just like new isn't necessarily better old isn't either. It's not the ol
by ternaryoperator 10y ago
>This goes for anything that's old. But that does not equate to 'good', it's just old. Just like new isn't necessarily better old isn't either.
It's not the old part that he's praising but the fact that it's been extensively tested. That's definitely a plus.
- jacquesm 10y ago> It's not the old part that he's praising but the fact that it's been extensively tested. That's definitely a plus. Yes, but that 'plus' is largely negated by the huge minuses of the language itself to the point that you would probably produce something a lot more reliable by using something less battle tested and newer, and besides that there are other options that just as battle tested or even more so and better so why settle for less? (Erlang, for instance)