Website message overhaul

[Jeff Nowakowski]

On 11/14/2011 08:05 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
> That doesn't seem the case to me at all. Multi-paradigm programming
> language has a rather precise meaning - it's a language that allows
> several of the classic programming styles (functional, object-oriented,
> procedural, generic).

It's not precise at all. Very few languages are actually 
single-paradigm. Is C++ multi-paradigm, even though it bills itself as 
such? Well compared to Smalltalk it is, but its functional support is 
crap, and generics are a nightmare. Is Java multi-paradigm? Why not? It 
isn't as religious as Smalltalk, has primites and arrays, with some 
generic support, and you can always kluge functional programming. What 
about Common Lisp? Sure, it has lots of parenthesis, but you can bend 
the language and it has support for objects (CLOS).

Multi-paradigm is *not* a selling point. Explicit features are. This is 
one of these cases where you are arguing from a dead-end position. A 
reaction about marketing from your community cannot be explained away, 
because marketing is about about perceptions.