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,fca456da8e6ec463
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-07 11:00:37 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!supernews.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!uunet!lax.uu.net!sac.uu.net!usenet.rational.com!not-for-mail
From: "Mark Lundquist" <mark@rational.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Latin, Shakespeare, Ecclesiastes and other irrelevant topics
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 10:59:16 -0800
Organization: Rational Software
Message-ID: <95s5ve$kf2$1@usenet.rational.com>
References: <mailman.980423781.16161.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <94p9fl$a1g$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <Pine.BSF.4.21.0101250921430.10262-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
 <94qbb4$bs1$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <94rkj1$d4r$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <87k87i2ha7.fsf@deneb.enyo.de>
 <Pine.BSF.4.21.0101262056580.20133-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
 <94vnup$kia$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <954svq$mt1$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <95fbiu$nen$4@usenet.rational.com> <3A7B5EC8.55E203D2@acm.org>
 <95mkjp$snm$1@usenet.rational.com> <3A7F00D7.494EF114@easystreet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ext-4254.rational.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4938
Date: 2001-02-07T10:59:16-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Al Christians <achrist@easystreet.com> wrote in message
news:3A7F00D7.494EF114@easystreet.com...
>
> OK.  How would Hamlet have worked out better if Shakespeare had used
> Ada?  Would it have come in in 45 minutes with 40% fewer actors and
> 60% less tragedy?

Would Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern still be dead?...




:-)
-- mark