Keith P. Boruff wrote:
> James Britt wrote:
> I also wasn't trying to sound like a diehard advocate of *refactoring*. Like
> all techniques, it has its good and bad points. 

To be sure, and I suspect people do refactoring without ever knowing it 
has a name.  I apologize if I painted you as a zealot or anything.

> 
> The only thing I am advocating is that refactoring and programming languages
> are, for the most part, two mutually exclusive topics. I felt this
> necessary because someone here stated that without bad programming
> languages, refactoring is not needed. 

I don't think that was anyone's intended statement.  More that some 
languages push you into circumstances where refactoring is both more 
frequently required and harder to do.

James