> How can it possibly be that for something as important as software,
> and for languages that are a decade old, there is 'inadequate data'
> to support a language decision, and if the data is in fact
> inadequate, how can it be that it's not worth spending any time or
> money getting some data?  Or, if it's another case of "make the
> decision, then do the staff work", what does it say that nobody
> even bothers to pretend to justify the decision. :(
Let me guess how Ralph Crafts, the ex-fighter jockey, would reply:

"Ready; fire; aim."

Right, Ralph? :-)