From: Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com   
      
   bart  writes:   
   > On 28/10/2025 02:35, Janis Papanagnou wrote:   
   >> On 27.10.2025 16:11, bart wrote:   
   [...]   
   >>> If speed wasn't an issue then we'd all be using easy dynamic languages   
   >> Huh? - Certainly not.   
   >   
   > *I* would! That's why I made my scripting languages as fast and   
   >  capable as possible, so they could be used for more tasks.   
   >   
   > However, if I dare to suggest that even one other person in the world   
   > might also have the same desire, you'd say that I can't possibly know   
   > that.   
   >   
   > And yet here you are: you say 'certainly not'. Obviously *you* know   
   > everyone else's mindset!   
      
   I'll give this one more try.   
      
   This kind of thing makes it difficult to communicate with you.   
      
   In this particular instances, you wrote that "we'd **all** be using easy   
   dynamic languages" (emphasis added).   
      
   Janis replied "Certainly not." -- meaning that we would not **all** be   
   using easy dynamic languages.  Janis is correct if there are only a few   
   people, or even one person, who would not use easy dynamic languages.   
      
   In reply to that, you wrote that **you** would use such languages --   
   which is fine and dandy, but it doesn't refute what Janis wrote.   
      
   Nobody at any time claimed that *nobody* would use easy dynamic   
   languages.  Obviously some people do and some people don't.  If speed   
   were not an issue, that would still be the case, though it would likely   
   change the numbers.  (There are valid reasons other than speed to use   
   non-dynamic languages.)   
      
   Are you with me so far?   
      
   You then wrote:   
      
       However, if I dare to suggest that even one other person in the world   
       might also have the same desire, you'd say that I can't possibly know   
       that.   
      
   That's wrong.  I'll assume it was an honest mistake.  If you suggested   
   that even one other person might also have the same desire, I don't   
   think anyone would dispute it.  *Of course* there are plenty of people   
   who want to use dynamic languages, and there would be more if speed were   
   not an issue.  As you have done before, you make incorrect assumptions   
   about other people's thoughts and motives.   
      
   > And yet here you are: you say 'certainly not'. Obviously *you* know   
   > everyone else's mindset!   
      
   The "certainly not" was in response to your claim that we would ALL   
   be using dynamic languages, a claim that was at best hyberbole.  Nobody   
   has claimed to know everyone else's mindset.   
      
   You misunderstood what Janis wrote.  It happens to all of us.  You just   
   need to be aware that what Janis wrote was not what you thought Janis   
   wrote, and you have reacted to something nobody said -- and not for the   
   first time.   
      
   This post is likely to be a waste of time, but I'm prepared to be   
   pleasantly surprised.   
      
   --   
   Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com   
   void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)