From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 9 Apr 93 17:14:13 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.n
ear.net!inmet!dsd!ryer@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Mike Ryer)
Subject: Re: perl in an Ada-mandated world
Message-ID: <1993Apr9.171413.13185@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Newsgroups: Comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: LISP in the Ada-mandated world (was Re: perl ... )
References: <1993Apr9.152116.3070@evb.com>

I get the idea ... If we write our LISP interpreter/compilers in Ada,
and our Jovial compilers in Ada, and our C compilers in Ada then any
language goes.  We could even use the automatic X-to-Ada translator
to re-write our existing compilers in Ada, and then we could attain all 
the advances in software engineering and reductions in life-cycle cost 
intended by the mandate without giving up PERL, APL, COBOL, FORTRAN IV, 
*LISP, Common LISP, SNOBOL, PL/1, Modula, Eiffel, CLU, Basic, Jovial, 
SPL/1, TACPOL, Smalltalk, Pascal, or that other language.

Perhaps if we re-write some Assemblers in Ada ...

-- Mike ;-) Ryer (speaking for myself only)