> Right. And when somebody writes the benchmarks in assembly and it's 
> another 80% faster, that will mean that C sucks, right?

Now you're getting the hang of it :-)  You see that pretty much every 
language can be called "perfectly suited" or "totally sucks" depending on 
what you want to actually do with it.  If you want to compare languages then 
*first* you need to explicity state what it is you want to do.  You can't 
just say "everyone agrees language X sucks", because they don't.

> FWIW, it's not *impossible* to do graphics on Windows. I've done it. It's 
> just more fiddly than it should be. (E.g., you have to install GTK first, 
> and then compile Gtk2hs from source, and when you finally get it to work, 
> all your applications look like Linux apps rather than native Windows 
> apps...)

Sounds like a good definition of "sucky" to me (if you're trying to write an 
app with a Windows GUI) :-D

Post a reply to this message