> That's pretty flawed logic.
Exactly. I was replying to his message and mocking his way of conduction a conversation. That should be viewed with that in mind.
> "B is better than A at property C." "Z is better than B at property C; let's ignore the valid A vs B comparison."
Yes. I think you probably want to direct that at gp post, not my post ;-) You also probably want to use different capitalization for properties than to entities (or at least letters from the other end of the alphabet), like say B is better than A at property x
> I like and use Go not because of any single aspect, but because I enjoy the entire package
Yeah Go is great I like it too!
>That's pretty flawed logic.
To show that it was "flawed logic" was the whole purpose of his remark.
That's pretty flawed logic. It can be used to dismiss any valid statement. "B is better than A at property C." "Z is better than B at property C; let's ignore the valid A vs B comparison."
What matters is how much better something is at a given property, how valuable that property is (to you/your tasks), and what the cost that improvement is - in the context of the big picture.
I like and use Go not because of any single aspect, but because I enjoy the entire package. It has some good parts and some weak parts (e.g., I wish the `go build import/path` command would be consistent in generating/not generating output in cwd regardless whether the target package is a command or library - that way it could be reliably used to test if a package builds without potentially generating files in cwd).