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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,4961da398a273222
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-03-01 10:41:06 PST
Path: 
 nntp.gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!nntpserver.pppl.gov!princeton!gw1.att.com!fnnews.fnal.gov!uwm.edu!news.alpha.net!news.mathworks.com!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!swrinde!pipex!sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk!cs.york.ac.uk!tgc102
From: tgc102@minster.york.ac.uk (Thomas G. Coles (1W0))
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada self-referential operators
Message-ID: <794083266.15@cs.york.ac.uk>
Date: 1 Mar 1995 18:41:06 GMT
References: <3id0oo$e64@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
 <1995Feb23.114533.27910@driftwood.cray.com>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Date: 1995-03-01T18:41:06+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 23 Feb 95 11:45:33 CST, Brian Hanson (brh@cray.com) wrote:
: In article e64@gnat.cs.nyu.edu, dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
: >but this needs to be balanced by a concern for keeping the language simple.
:                                                                      ^^^^^^^
: Not quite the word I would use to describe Ada.  Uniform, Consistant may be
: better but NOT simple.

I may not be the best judge, but I wouldn't dispute the use of `simple' to
describe Ada.  Perhaps I'm not tackling quite such difficult problems, but it
seems pretty reasonable to me.

What WOULD you consider a simple language, Brian? (Chap sitting next to me
says `English' !)

Thomas

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -
Thomas Coles                    tgc102@ugrad.cs.york.ac.uk
Goodricke College             or tgc102@minster.york.ac.uk
University of York                   "God preserve us from 
York, YO1 5DD, UK                       religious nutters"