Re: Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use

[cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter)]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:52:29 +1000, "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au>
wrote:

>"Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> wrote in message 
>news:4c10b912$5$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net...
>| In <4c102ad5$0$56577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>, on 06/10/2010
>|   at 09:59 AM, "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> said:
>|
>| >You have no idea what the issue im dispute was,
>| >and others have told you so,
>|
>| You're lying again. In
>| <4bba8bf1$0$56418$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> you challenged the
>| statement
>|
>|     Important numerical libraries were first
>|   | implemented in ALgol,
>|
>| *THAT* is the issue under dispute, and you keep trying to pretend that
>| it is something else.
>
>You really don't have a clue, do you.
>That statement is what I claimed was not true.
>I presented examples of such that were implemented
>before ALGOL came along.
>
>As well as that, I cited examples of numerical algorithms
>that were running on machines years before ALGOL came along.

Neither of you clowns are lying; both of you are incompetent
readers of ordinary English prose. The statement in question is
ambiguous; it can be read as "Some Important numerical libraries
were first implemented in ALgol" or "All Important numerical
libraries were first implemented in ALgol".  He's using the
former reading, you the latter.  

Aren't you a bit old to be playing such silly games?


Richard Harter, cri@tiac.net
http://home.tiac.net/~cri, http://www.varinoma.com
Reality is real; words are real too.
However words are not reality.