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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,ea30c4e9c3d00b
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ea30c4e9c3d00b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Franck Arnaud <franck_arnaud@tcam.stratus.com>
Subject: Re: Ultimate Language feature list
Date: 1998/05/15
Message-ID: <355C1016.5112CA84@tcam.stratus.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 353467563
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <6jc18b$lug$1@news.eclipse.net> <355BCB54.1DAA@ozemail.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: (not speaking for any)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1998-05-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Chris Miller:

> I always understood that the "ultimate" language was, by 
> definition, an interpreter for the English language!

Why English then? Many human languages, existing or thinkable, are
better. English is some sort of C++ of human languages, not very well
designed, lots of legacy constructs and inconsistencies, pathetic
standardisation, etc, but it is popular and widely used.