Richard wrote:One characteristic of multi-platform languages is that they are, at best, a compromise solution. The inability to define, or the failure to achieve perfection, is a positive human characteristic,
So if I keep this up for another few msgs, ANY failure probably will be represented as a "positive human characteristic" :-)
As far as the devil goes, it is in the details. I discussed some of the issues in depth, while you stuck to a few "positive" platitudes.
I assume the reader can make up his own mind, and ward of the devil where boundless optimism fragments and damages the project. (and that doesn't need to be the ultimate “knell of doom”, a few years set back is painfull too).
Finally, as far as the devels go, the only thing I ask is for honest communication.
If they adapt unix centric visions, and put windows on the backburner in the hope that someone will fix it, it is their right to do so, and I even understand it on some level.
But please communicate honestly about it, and avoid sustaining false hopes and people investing time in doomed aspects.
A Devil's Advocate cannot be involved in the high-level planning of a successful project because the focus on failure, precludes any advance.
This particularly stung me. Just because I'm not a starry eyed dreamer that thinks we can compete with something as gigantic as C++, I'm "focussed on failure"? Now who is biassed here.......
And I'll stick my neck out again, and risk being accused of a negative attitude again, but can you say "succesful project" with a straight face? Look around, FB is pretty much in the same state as 2 years ago. Some minor evolutionary progress has been made, but can you really say any of the wild plans of that period have bore fruit and are in production?
Anyway, this is my last post on the subject.