yasmincrist82 Once a rattlesnake bit him, after 5 days of excruciating pain, the snake finally died
annmarieking8 It is not the responsibility of the language to force good looking code, but the language should make good looking code possible.
almost 2 years ago • Reply
mrsmaclindgren9 It is not the responsibility of the language to force good looking code, but the language should make good looking code possible.
almost 2 years ago • Reply
karldouglas36 Because of the Turing completeness theory, everything one Turing-complete language can do can theoretically be done by another Turing-complete language, but at a different cost. You can do everything in assembler, but no one wants to program in assembler anymore.
almost 2 years ago • Reply
herbvon13 From the viewpoint of what you can do, therefore, languages do differ - but the differences are limited. For example, Python and Ruby provide almost the same power to the programmer.
almost 2 years ago • Reply
nathanielterry37 I didn't work hard to make Ruby perfect for everyone, because you feel differently from me. No language can be perfect for everyone. I tried to make Ruby perfect for me, but maybe it's not perfect for you. The perfect language for Guido van Rossum is probably Python.
almost 2 years ago • Reply
vincefranecki81 Actually, I didn't make the claim that Ruby follows the principle of least surprise. Someone felt the design of Ruby follows that philosophy, so they started saying that. I didn't bring that up, actually.
almost 2 years ago • Reply