First, thank you for reading. This article was meant entirely to spur discussion so I thank you for taking the time to discuss.
Second, I don't think an argument that most people choose based on quality is pertinent to the theory. The theory just states that the market decides. It does not infer than any metric the market uses is inherently better or worse than others.
Third, your COBOL example is explicitly excluded from the theory as not being in a free-market. Thus it is fading away slowly. If it were truly up to the market (no external regulation from business interests) it would be dead.*
* In this case the market is defined as the direct consumers of the programming language. The programmers themselves. As opposed to indirect consumers (organizations).
First, thank you for reading. This article was meant entirely to spur discussion so I thank you for taking the time to discuss.
Second, I don't think an argument that most people choose based on quality is pertinent to the theory. The theory just states that the market decides. It does not infer than any metric the market uses is inherently better or worse than others.
Third, your COBOL example is explicitly excluded from the theory as not being in a free-market. Thus it is fading away slowly. If it were truly up to the market (no external regulation from business interests) it would be dead.*
* In this case the market is defined as the direct consumers of the programming language. The programmers themselves. As opposed to indirect consumers (organizations).