>> "Rocks" is most commonly used in the context of (rock) music
False.
>> we know from other context that there isn't a programming language competition.
I would have expected at least one comparison to another programming language. Like "COBOL" was a real pain for this, but "Go rocks".
>> ... other stuff ...
Yeah, I don't really care one way or the other. If people want say that everything in space and time are completely undifferentiated and therefore "rock" equally, I don't really care. Rock on.
Nobody does. Why would they? It isn't like there is a competition or something.
> If people want say that everything in space and time are completely undifferentiated and therefore "rock" equally, I don't really care.
Many things having the potential to "rock" does not imply that everything "rocks" equally, or at all. I strongly suspect his attempt to write a Lua interpreter in Brainfuck would not "rock".
Let's see if we can break HN nesting algo with this thread.
>> Many things having the potential to "rock" does not imply that everything "rocks" equally, or at all
That isn't what I am suggesting. I am saying that I do not care if people use the word "rocks" to describe an impossibly spherical marble rolling on an impossibly flat surface - equal across all space and time. Or, to describe, something that is uniquely better than all others. Use the term as you see fit. Use it to describe the value 4.532341 +/- 0.00001345 if you like.
False.
>> we know from other context that there isn't a programming language competition.
I would have expected at least one comparison to another programming language. Like "COBOL" was a real pain for this, but "Go rocks".
>> ... other stuff ...
Yeah, I don't really care one way or the other. If people want say that everything in space and time are completely undifferentiated and therefore "rock" equally, I don't really care. Rock on.