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: f5d71,7a278735334db126
X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,7a278735334db126
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7a278735334db126
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,7a278735334db126
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-06 07:49:13 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn54feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s52.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@comAcast.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.java,comp.lang.ada
References: <ca7cfadf.0402051413.519cc019@posting.google.com>
 <bvufh8$8dg$1@chessie.cirr.com> <uRzUb.121$NI4.3318@eagle.america.net>
 <rvAUb.230815$xy6.1173694@attbi_s02> <c00cof$lrv$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Subject: Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Message-ID: <YHOUb.186528$sv6.989425@attbi_s52>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.62.230.177
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-Trace: attbi_s52 1076082552 24.62.230.177 (Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:49:12 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:49:12 GMT
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 15:49:12 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.c++:17883 comp.lang.c:20672
 comp.lang.java:2713 comp.lang.ada:5283
Date: 2004-02-06T15:49:12+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Georg Bauhaus" <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> wrote...
> In comp.lang.ada Victor Bazarov <v.Abazarov@comacast.net> wrote:
> : "Larry Hazel" <lhhazel@otelco.net> wrote...
> :> Christopher Benson-Manica wrote:
> :>
> :> >
> :> >
> :> > When I need a language that's easy to use and readable, I turn
> :> > directly to C.
> :> >
> :>
> :> C?  Easy to read?  You have got to be kidding.
> :
> : I, on the other hand have no
> : idea how to read Chinese.  But I don't exclaim "you've got
> : to be kidding" when somebody says that Chinese is possible
> : to read.
>
> Possible...  "readable", then "easy to read", then "possible
> to read". Some of Chinese ideographic content is easy to remember if
> you learn to distinguish the pictures.  Doesn't mean that Chinese
> writing is easy to understand, e.g. because of context dependence.
> Now what does "read" mean?

What are you arguing about?  For somebody who never saw Latin alphabet,
and only read Chinese all his life, what's easier to read?  It has been
already mentioned, readability, or, if you so desire, easiness to read,
is in the eye of the beholder.  There is nothing else to talk about.