> 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.

It defies belief that anybody could disagree that BASIC is a horrifying 
abomination that should never be used for anything but the most trivial 
programming tasks. I mean, hell, that's even the original *design goal*: 
it's designed for beginners to do simple stuff with.

Still, this is the Internet. Any statement, no matter how irrefutable, 
will none the less be refuted by somebody. (Moon landings, anyone?)

>> 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

Well, I wrote a couple of small GUI tools that are in production use 
here where I work. None of the lab guys actually give a damn that the 
GUI looks slightly different.

Of course, that doesn't mean it isn't sucky...

(I should point out that the situation is slowly improving. It's just 
that there's still a long way left to go.)

Post a reply to this message