•Re: Re: •Re: How would you fix Java?

I don't know where you read "like". I didn't say you had to like these preferences, just that you buy into them. I don't like the notion of paying taxes, but I understand its purpose, and buy into it.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

Comment on •Re: Re: •Re: How would you fix Java?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: •Re: Re: •Re: How would you fix Java? by Anonymous Monk on Apr 22, 2003 at 03:25 UTC
Take your choice: s/like/approve of/ s/like/buy into/ s/like/enjoy using/ I thought the point was very obvious. Perhaps I should clarify again. You said: but if you want to prefer Java over Perl, you must buy into the following paradigms: ... Objects are universally better than non-objects My point is that you do not have to "buy into" the idea that "objects are universally better than non-objects." In fact, you could think that they are exactly identical in every aspect. This would not eliminate all reasons for using Java. Hence, you do not need to "buy into" the idea.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: •Re: Re: •Re: How would you fix Java?
by Anonymous Monk on Apr 22, 2003 at 03:25 UTC

Take your choice:

s/like/approve of/
s/like/buy into/
s/like/enjoy using/

I thought the point was very obvious. Perhaps I should clarify again. You said:

but if you want to prefer Java over Perl, you must buy into the following paradigms:
...
Objects are universally better than non-objects

My point is that you do not have to "buy into" the idea that "objects are universally better than non-objects." In fact, you could think that they are exactly identical in every aspect. This would not eliminate all reasons for using Java. Hence, you do not need to "buy into" the idea.

[reply]