It's a shame because it is just as effective as pissing in the wind.
It's a shame because it is just as effective as pissing in the wind.
Of course, by your reasoning this also means you yourself have designed a language.
I'll leave out repeating your colorful language if you haven't done any of these things.
Actually I think that's a reasonable argument. I've not designed a language myself (other than toy experiments) so I'm hesitant to denigrate other people's design choices because even with my limited experience I'm aware that there are always compromises.
Similarly, I'm not impressed by literary critics whose own writing is unimpressive.
No, I stick by my position. I may not be able to do any better, but I can tell when something’s not good.
(I have no opinion on Go. I’ve barely used it. This is only on the general principle of being able to judge something you couldn’t do yourself. I mean, the Olympics have gymnastic judges who are not gold medalists.)