>>8
There was a fairly interesting conversation not too long ago with a similar line of reasoning starting here: http://textboard.org/prog/167/19
I still haven't made up my mind about the arguments there. In any case I will make the argument here that if you're re-writing the same basics over and over again you're not programming right unless your standard is too small to have modules, or even load (even then you should probably just copy-paste). Also in light of Gödel I question trading consistency for completeness. ))
>>9
Better link: http://textboard.org/prog/167/19,21-24