Guido at Google

[bonono at gmail.com]

Alex Martelli wrote:
> In the general case, it's pretty general;-).  In the specific case of
> your "question" above quoted (interpreting the mis-spelled words and
> grammatical errors to the best of my modest ability), reading it as
> rhetorical means it's in fact intended as a statement (that a particular
> programming language cannot have high priority for organizations of size
> similar to MS's and Google's), and such a statement is incorrect (as I
> tried showing with several examples displaying "particular programming
> languages" having high strategical priorities for organizations with
> many thousands of employees, including one with more personnel [larger
> size] than Google's).
So exactly how high is python in Google's priority list ? Or in other
words, if python is in a stand still as it is now, what would be the
impact to Google ? As an outsider, I can only base on public info, like
a press release mentioning Guido has been hired.

>
> An example of rhetorical question:
> "Do you really think that a specific technology [including a software
> one, such as a programming language] cannot have, in certain cases,
> *extremely high* strategic priority for organizations with thousands of
> employees?"
>
> In this example, the question is phrased to hint at how silly such an
> opinion would be, and therefore imply that you can't really think that
> (and must have ulterior motives for so suggesting, etc etc).  Rhetorical
> questions are a perfectly legitimate style of writing (although, like
> all stylistic embellishments, they can be overused, and can be made much
> less effective if murkily or fuzzily phrased), of course.
Surprisingly, I don't see this as an rhetorical question at all. It is
quite netural to me as a "I don't agree with you" without indication of
silliness, just a style of writing.