Now it seems we are in agreement. A couple of clarifications...

The problem is only partially defining "the job." The other part is defining "done."

If you are having a hard time defining "done" that's probably because the job in question is a proverbial "job that's never done" or it was poorly defined in the first place.

The statement seems to imply that two languages can be equal for a task - they cannot.

I didn't mean to imply that. But the choice should not be made through "objective analysis" of the languages alone. The decision should be made within the context of the "job" that must be "done".

To bring this full circle and back to the original questions posed by pg, it comes down to this: if someone tells you that you picked the wrong language without being intimately familiar with the "job" you picked it for, he is talking out his ass even if he can argue the technical advantages and defend the disadvantages of his language of choice better than you can yours.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";