This may be true of facts, but there is no problem with explaining why your opinion is one way and not the other.
Unless you are asserting that speed not being important is a fact of exploratory programming, rather than PG's opinion, I see no problem with answering my initial question.
If it makes you feel better though, I can rephrase:
There's still no answer to that question. If I needed speed, I could explain why. But there's no answer to the question of why you don't need speed.
I need a bottle opener to get the lid off a bottle. I need it because I need to bend the lid. I don't need a scarf to get the lid off a bottle. Why not? There's no reason you don't need a scarf to get the lid off a bottle; it's just not that useful.
Comments
This may be true of facts, but there is no problem with explaining why your opinion is one way and not the other.
Unless you are asserting that speed not being important is a fact of exploratory programming, rather than PG's opinion, I see no problem with answering my initial question.
If it makes you feel better though, I can rephrase:
Why is speed not important to you, PG?
There's still no answer to that question. If I needed speed, I could explain why. But there's no answer to the question of why you don't need speed.
I need a bottle opener to get the lid off a bottle. I need it because I need to bend the lid. I don't need a scarf to get the lid off a bottle. Why not? There's no reason you don't need a scarf to get the lid off a bottle; it's just not that useful.
Fair enough. I see your point and thank you for your patience.
If I may give this one last shot:
Why is slowness acceptable in a language tuned towards exploratory programming, and therefore an unimportant criteria when judging Arc?