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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: "Norman H. Cohen" Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/28 Message-ID: <32EE6764.69EC@watson.ibm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212945042 references: <32E47B4B.56D9@concentric.net> <6PI998tV3RB@herold.franken.de> <5c4ab5$134$1@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: ncohen@watson.ibm.com newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) Date: 1997-01-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > Hmm. I have mixed feelings about that statement. Since I know nothing > about R or S, I'm willing to believe that the R language has an entirely > appropriate set of static and dynamic rules, for this type of > "application". ... > As you can see from this thread, Smalltalk is well-regarded > by many of its users, and Ada is well-regarded by many of its users, and > the same for C -- isn't there some sort of objective reality, that goes > beyond what programmers think they like? R? S? Ada? C? Why this obsession with languages whose names are palindromes? ... > > - Bob Ah, now I understand! :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) -- Norman H. Cohen mailto:ncohen@watson.ibm.com http://www.research.ibm.com/people/n/ncohen