<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:02 AM, jayasimha makineni <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jayasimha.makineni@gmail.com">jayasimha.makineni@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>Let us train more programmers who can truly be *programmers*. Python is </blockquote><div><br>How do you make that decision ? Is there an objective set of criterion ?<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
perhaps the best vehicle for that journey. My understanding is that those who </blockquote><div><br>Advocacy isn't the subject matter, I believe ! :-)<br>There is "a best tool" for every job, and very rarely, "one best tool" for every job !!<br>
<br></div><snip><br><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">And their managers have an even worse feeling to face facts because they have to justify their salaries and other bills too.<br>
<font color="#888888">
</font></blockquote></div><br>First thing is for the managers to justify their own salaries. IMHO, talking of lacunae, we are riddled with a defunct hierarchy of managers who switched tracks because they could no longer keep up with the productivity and smartness of younger, smarter and more agile bunch of engineers !! of course, that is generalisation streched too far... but i doubt, too detached from reality.<br>
<br>-- <br>regards,<br>Banibrata<br><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta">http://www.linkedin.com/in/bdutta</a><br>