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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,84bf0ec36cf20893
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-15 04:39:28 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: tatebll@aol.com (Bill Tate)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Would an *AdaScript* language be a good / bad idea?
Date: 15 May 2002 04:39:27 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <cb4ba455.0205150339.1a841905@posting.google.com>
References: <mr41eu4klae9knk5978o0ru89i5vjc6u2e@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.12.104.162
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1021462768 12604 127.0.0.1 (15 May 2002 11:39:28
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 May 2002 11:39:28 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24090
Date: 2002-05-15T11:39:28+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

James Ross <rem.jr@rem.webross.com> wrote in message news:<mr41eu4klae9knk5978o0ru89i5vjc6u2e@4ax.com>...
> We have JavaScript and VBScript ...
> 
> And then there is Perl, Python, ... etc.
> 
> If someone where to create a type-less and interpreted variant of the
> Ada language, that for all practical purposes was Ada syntax / rules
> without the strong typing -- would that be a useful or worthwhile
> thing to do?  Or would it be just obfuscating what Ada is all about?
> 
> JR

Perhaps http://pyada.sourceforge.net/ would be of some interest. 
Gerhard Haring's page is still available on-line. While its not
currently being maintained, I don't imagine there would be a
resistance to someone pursuing it further.  As to whether it would be
worthwhile or not - others are better suited to answering that
question.