🚀 go-pugleaf

In gnu.misc.discuss, Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> call me a liar, and
accuses me or worse.  That's simply not acceptable to me personally, since
while I sometimes get things wrong, I do not intentionally deceive.  If my
technical expertise and experience cannot stand on their own, then put me
in your kill files.  Taking this to heart, I will not be reading any more
of his postings, as they're not good for my bloodpressure and responding
to his spitting contest is clearly a waste of time.

I supply one quote from RMS's public statements that should cause you
to question his view on freedom of choice:

    Date: Fri, 23 Sep 94 19:14:52 -0400
    From: rms@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Richard Stallman)
    Subject: Why you should not use Tcl

    ....

    Some people plan to use Tcl because they want to use Tk.  Thankfully,
    it is possible to use Tk without Tcl.  A Scheme interpreter called STk
    is already available.  Please, if you want to use Tk, use it with STk,
    not with Tcl.  One place to get STk is from
    ftp.cs.indiana.edu:pub/scheme-repository/imp/STk-2.1.tar.Z

I don't have his other posting on line, so maybe that statement was 
retracted; as it is, it's not very encouraging.

I know that don't look forward to a GNUOS where sysadmin files are in lisp;
I doubt whether other many sysadmins do either.  While I don't really think
this will be done for the hurd, you never know.  Even if it's the C-like
scheme front end, it'll be so radically different from other systems which
use (k|ba)sh, sed, awk, and perl for their admin that it will annoy a lot
of folks.

Yes, I know plan9 used rc.  It was the right choice, as they had a chance
to fix sh stupidities.  But a lot of people have fixed sh stupidities
(even tcl does that for pete's sake).  

--tom
-- 
Tom Christiansen      Perl Consultant, Gamer, Hiker      tchrist@mox.perl.com
    "The only reason for being a professional writer is that 
     you can't help it."
	--Wilson Mizner