Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint

[Thomas Lindgren]

"Marshall Spight" <mspight at dnai.com> writes:

> "Kenny Tilton" <ktilton at nyc.rr.com> wrote in message news:Zn7mb.35483$pT1.33385 at twister.nyc.rr.com...
> >
> > Lights out for static typing.
> 
> That kind of statement reminds me a lot of the people
> who were saying in 1985 that CISC computing was
> dead.

Because Intel ultimately triumphed over the pundits advocating another
solution?

Because differences in instruction set architecture due to
implementation advances ultimately became irrelevant for
high-performance computers? (Meaning all non-embedded ones, that is.)

Because a big, somewhat worse standard (x86) beat a squabbling horde of
somewhat better contenders (RISCs)?

Because the marketplace moved on from "workstations", stranding the
high-cost, high-performance systems in favour of low-cost,
nearly-same-performance systems? Which then overtook the former
champions.

Something else?

Best,
                        Thomas
-- 
Thomas Lindgren
"It's becoming popular? It must be in decline." -- Isaiah Berlin