PL's as tools is a half-accurate analogy. If you're going to stretch it that far, shouldn't you use something more accurate? Or better, not use an analogy for

PL's as tools is a half-accurate analogy. If you're going to stretch it that far, shouldn't you use something more accurate? Or better, not use an analogy for something that detailed? Say, PL's are materials. They are something that useful things "tools" are fashioned out of. The properties of a material affect the entire thing built out of it, in modest but pervasive ways. Some programs are built in more than one language, this could be seen as an object built with different materials for different parts. Now, whether mainstream languages are analogous to different iron alloys, wood, concrete or plastic is a different discussion. (And maybe another exercise in taking an analogy too far...) Not sure where I saw this analogy first, since I can't find it on LtU...