From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!rpi!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!gryphon!pnet02!bagpiper
From: bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com (Michael Hunter)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: 9X and the NEED for preprocessing
Message-ID: <23708@gryphon.COM>
Date: 22 Dec 89 04:40:24 GMT
Sender: root@gryphon.COM
Organization: People-Net [pnet02], Redondo Beach, CA.
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>I doubt there is a situation that REQUIRES the use of a preprocessor, but
>that doesn't mean we shouldn't have one.  We don't really NEED a "for loop"
>in Ada, nor recursion, nor many other features that one programmer chooses
>to use while another does not.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't have them.
We HAVE to have (some form of) recursion.  There are some things that just
can't be unrolled.

                                        Michael

Mike Hunter - Box's and CPU's from HELL: iapx80[012]86, PR1ME 50 Series, 1750a
UUCP: {ames!elroy, <routing site>}!gryphon!pnet02!bagpiper
INET: bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com