Kubuntu a dist in crisis?

[O. Sinclair]

Derek Broughton wrote:
> Steve Lamb wrote:
> 
>> Chris Jones wrote:
>>> The bottom line is "each to your own", everyone has their own favorite
>>> language, and generalized statements about how one is faster to code in
>>> than the other are nonsense.
>>     This patently false and easily demonstrable.  If it were true why 
>>     would we need any of the other languages past assembly?  Indeed, why 
>>     any new languages, anywhere, at all?
> 
> You're talking _specifics_, not generalizations.  We need high-level 
> languages (in general) because they are easier to code in, but we don't need 
> Python instead of Fortran _for every task_.  Some things will be easier to 
> write in one language than another.  If we tried to make something that 
> handled _all_ tasks equally well, we'd probably have Assembler :-)  So, no, 
> your hypothesis is not only not easily demonstrable, but I think easily 
> disproven - all we have to do is find a single case where any action 
> requires fewer statements in one language than another to show a use where 
> the first language is better; then find a reverse case for the same two 
> languages.  And that, of course, only deals with the actual ease of 
> programming - there are still efficiencies to be gained for specific 
> functions written in specific languages (which is why so much of python 
> invokes C behind the curtain).
Gentlemen, has not this discussion left the topic in question since 
quite some time? If you feel like arguing on about programming languages 
I suggest a separate thread or, better yet, another mailing list for 
that discussion.