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: 10 Aug 93 02:38:01 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!seas.gwu.edu!mfeld
man@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Michael Feldman)
Subject: Re: forth/fifth generation languages?
Message-ID: <1993Aug10.023801.14891@seas.gwu.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <EACHUS.93Aug9150728@spectre.mitre.org> eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Ro
bert I. Eachus) writes:
>In article <1993Aug9.100625.462@sei.cmu.edu> firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) 
writes:
>
>   > Of course, to some of us, the peak is called "Algol-60", and C is
>   > a deep trench filled with primordial ooze.
>
>     Come on, Robert, everyone knows that Algol-W was a significant
>improvement on Algol-60.  (If you consider Algol-W to be a dialect of
>Algol-60, ignore the chiding tone. :-)
>
Was it Dijkstra who said "Algol-60 was a significant improvement on all
its successors"?

Mike Feldman