3 ms·

I think you misunderstand what GP meant; by "not a single metric", I don't think they mean "there is no metric" but "there's not solely one metric". The one you

by saghm 5y ago

I think you misunderstand what GP meant; by "not a single metric", I don't think they mean "there is no metric" but "there's not solely one metric". The one you give is reasonable in some contexts, but not every language is trying to optimize for that. "Winning" is relative to how you define the game, and not everyone will agree your definition is the one they care about.

javajosh 5y ago
If people don't like an assertion on which I base my analysis they can and should throw out the result. I am making a bold assertion, but I really think its right, so if you understand it enough to disagree with it, I'll call that a win. But I personally think the success criteria I've specified is not debatable, except of course as fodder for those who like to debate.
- capableweb 5y ago
  > But I personally think the success criteria I've specified is not debatable I take it as you see "success" in terms of programming languages as something objective then, not subjective?