Scheme vs ML again and again 
Author Message
 Scheme vs ML again and again

I am getting rather sick of this.

Could we please have a moratorium on Scheme vs ML arguments?

Let's just take it as given that both are good languages, that
those who know one of them better than the other may not fully
appreciate the virtures of the one they know less, and that
such people may not even have their facts straight.

Could we also please have a moratorium on arguments about
static vs dynamic typing?

-- jd



Fri, 15 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Scheme vs ML again and again

Quote:

> I am getting rather sick of this.

> Could we please have a moratorium on Scheme vs ML arguments?

> Let's just take it as given that both are good languages, that
> those who know one of them better than the other may not fully
> appreciate the virtures of the one they know less, and that
> such people may not even have their facts straight.

> Could we also please have a moratorium on arguments about
> static vs dynamic typing?

Hokay.  What would you *like* people to talk about??  :-)

                                Bear



Fri, 15 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Scheme vs ML again and again

   Date: Mon, 29 Jul 96 18:15:41 BST

   I am getting rather sick of this.

Hoo boy.  You aren't the only one.

   Could we please have a moratorium on Scheme vs ML arguments?

Sorry.  Free speech you know.  The ML partisans are going to exercise their
rights to free speech by filling our mailboxes with their opinions every
day for the rest of our lives.  It's kind of like those annoying electronic
mail adverti{*filter*}ts that we're all starting to see more and more of.
Eventually, it will just become accepted that when you ask a question about
Scheme on the Scheme mailing list, 96% of the replies will tell you that
you're a fool for not programming in ML (or Perl (or Tkl)).  You'll just
have to filter those out to get to the actual answer to your question.



Sat, 16 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Scheme vs ML again and again

   Could we please have a moratorium on Scheme vs ML arguments?

   [ ... ]

   Could we also please have a moratorium on arguments about
   static vs dynamic typing?

Am I violating your requirements by asking whether those two requests
are actually the same?  :-)

--
-Matthias



Sun, 17 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Scheme vs ML again and again

   Sorry.  Free speech you know.  The ML partisans are going to exercise their
   rights to free speech by filling our mailboxes with their opinions every
   day for the rest of our lives. ...

actually, ml partisans could not always know that some on the internet
get their news into their mailboxes and without assistance from agents
that sort, filter and refile...

                          It's kind of like those annoying electronic
   mail adverti{*filter*}ts that we're all starting to see more and more of.

evidently, anything can be made to look like that, given certain amount
of innocence.

oz



Sun, 17 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Scheme vs ML again and again

Quote:

> Could we also please have a moratorium on arguments about
> static vs dynamic typing?

While I agree with the rest of Jeff's remarks, I would hope he
is amenable to one exception: discussions of how optional static
typing systems can be incorporated into Scheme. Systems like
Infer would fall under this rubric.


Tue, 19 Jan 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 10 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Scheme vs ML again and again and again and again

2. Scheme vs ML again and again and again and again

3. static vs. dynamic typing (again, again)

4. APL and J (again and again) (long)

5. APL and J (again and again)

6. 'SQL Server Login': Again, again, ...

7. All in EXE file AGAIN AGAIN

8. trees again and again

9. Re-inventing hot water again and again

10. tcltest processes subdirectory again and again - Why?

11. Newsgroup access again, good to see you all again

12. How to make a command run again and again until it sees a certain pattern

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software