3 ms·
> * assembly is weak because it lacks pointer arithmetic Compared to C it is. That's why they invented C. > * C is weak because it lacks a proper OO Compare
by grammaton 16y ago
> * assembly is weak because it lacks pointer arithmetic
Compared to C it is. That's why they invented C.
> * C is weak because it lacks a proper OO
Compared to C++ or Java it would be - that's why they invented them.
> * Java is weak because Clojure is an add-on
Not sure I'm following your analogy here.
> * Ruby is weak because Rails is a separate download.
Have I been saying anything about web frameworks at any point?
You're making a bunch of false analogies. Compared to nothing other than itself, Perl is Perl. That's fine. It's axiomatic. Compared to other options, however, it does have some glaring shortcomings.
- rjbond3rd 16y ago> Not sure I'm following your analogy here... You're making a bunch of false analogies. Not false at all. Substituting FP for OO, the Java install "lacks" Clojure. So extensibility is a weakness? If so, then every gem is a sign of a defect in Ruby The Language (an absurd conclusion).
- whateverer 16y agoClojure is only a Java extension if Java on my machine is an x86 extension. Besides, what's being argued here is that some things should be in the core, not the negativity of an extensible core. I'm somewhat on the fence on the issue. One one hand, it is great to be able to improve your own language. On the other, you are creating/using a forked version of the language, and all the other libraries won't be using your OO -or generic dispatch, or exception or namespace- system, making everything inconsistent.