[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: OOBit
- From: "Peter Sommerfeld" <peter@...>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 01:52:26 +0200
Am 30.09.2010, 00:29 Uhr, schrieb Tim Mensch <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
On 9/29/2010 2:39 PM, Peter Sommerfeld wrote:
Anyway, I won't argue anymore, may be a matter of taste...
I agree with Christopher here, and disagree that it's just a matter
Your are right: It's more. I think these controversies arise
because Lua is not a language with a fixed set of application
areas or specific ideas about the best way to program but
more like forth or may be lisp, a tool to implement your
ideas according to your preferred way of programming and
the problem at hand.
I think that's the strength as well as the weakness of
Lua. It makes it easy to adopt it to your needs, but
makes interoperability difficult. And it adds some
The response of "get used to it" (AKA RTFM) is a classic apologist
response for a bad UI, when the correct response to a bad UI is to fix
the UI, not to make people try harder to use it "correctly".
It is not hard if you stick with your preferred idioms. You cannot
have both, flexibility and simplicity, choices come for a price.
And it is not apologistic if I prefer a small, fast and flexible
language over an inflexible one with a fixed set of policies and