Rev 4.0 article on TheServerSide

[Kay C Lan]

The simple solution to the following would be to provide a bibliography.

If every example on the pdf came from a non Rev site, and was per the PHP
example, ie an actual site that teaches how to write <insert programming
language here> then it would remove any accusation that Rev was
intentionally writing poor code comparisons.

my 2 clams

On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Kevin Miller <kevin at runrev.com> wrote:

> On 02/12/2009 20:41, "Andre Garzia" <andre at andregarzia.com> wrote:
>
> > Actually I think some of the comments have a point. That language
> > comparision pdf is misleading. Even I could write better code than that
> in
> > those languages. I would suggest people on runrev would change that pdf
> to
> > present optimum code in C++/C#/JAVA and the like, like, very professional
> > code and see how well Rev stacks against it, even if they are all one
> > liners, Rev will be more readable and thus win points. If you post crappy
> > code, the users of those languages will clearly recognize the pdf as a
> bad
> > practice and have a bad impression of the language.
>
> The
> question we were asking was "Which language is going to be easier in day to
> day use"? For example, the code on the PHP comparison was based on an
> example posted on a site that *teaches* how to write PHP. So clearly its of
> a standard that is used in the real world. If you're an expert coding in
> PHP
> every day you can shorten it. Same with the revTalk example as it happens.
>
>