Re: on Perl

On Wed, 17 Apr 2024, John Ames wrote:

On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 16:15:14 -0000 (UTC)
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>

(it means i am engaging in what is nominally a gesture of respect in
a mocking way, so as to indicate that your pompous demands for
respect are being deliberately ignored)

>
Wasn't a demand for respect, just making a point about serious
applications and the languages used for them. Games arn't serious.

>
Your definition of "serious applications" seems to coincide pretty
substantially with "fields I, personally, have worked in," particularly
since you've conveniently ignored the passel of non-game applications
that have also been cited in order to focus on the one you feel most
prepared to trivialize and discount in pursuance of your "argument."
And in addition to habitually slagging on applications and tools you
don't consider "serious" for no particular reason and with zero
provocation, you name-call like a grade-schooler. So it's difficult
*not* to parse your overall behavior as simian chest-thumping and
expecting to be treated as Le Fromage Grande on the basis of standards
conveniently set by yourself.
>

Have another go aspie.

>
Case in point. But for the sake of argument, let's review:
>
Person: "This thing exists."
Muttley: "Nobody uses that."
People: "Here's all these things that use that."
Muttley: "Those don't count."
People: "Come again?"
Muttley: "They're not serious."
People: "What's your definition of 'serious' here?"
Muttley: "Things that I've worked on."
People: "...Um."
Muttley: "Also you're a poopiehead."

Sorry Muttley, I have to give this one to John. His argument is flawless and spot on.