On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 12:29:26AM +0900, David Vallner wrote:
> >time.  In paraphrase, it was (summarized):
> >
> >  Regardless of how good or bad a decision a given language is for a
> >  given task, Ruby is more likely to get you fired that Java.
> >
> 
> 
> To be fair, it's not just corporate politics. Statistically, it's more 
> likely a development house will have a strong base of Java developers or 
> C# developers (C#, while being very young and so far an abomination unto 
> Nuggan, is reasonably Java compatible), and that starting a Rails 
> project means you'll probably have to get people with no Ruby experience 
> on the team, or create a burden on the company in case the original team 
> falls apart and quits to other companies regarding maintenance, or whatever.

Choosing a language despite the resources at your disposal, rather than
because of them, would probably make that a "bad decision".  That in no
way invalidates the summarized point I already made:

"Regardless of how good or bad a decision a given language is for a
given task, Ruby is more likely to get you fired that Java."

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
"The ability to quote is a serviceable
substitute for wit." - W. Somerset Maugham