Do really Ada give you a camel when you expected a horse?

["Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

After the “bloated language”, “military language” and others funny  
criticisms, here is the “committee language” criticism:

Quoted from a Lua history paper, http://www.lua.org/history.html

     There is an old joke that says that "a camel is a horse
     designed by a committee". Among programming-language people,
     this joke is almost as popular as the legend about programming
     languages designed by committees. This legend is supported by
     languages like Algol 68, PL/I, and Ada, all designed by
     committees, which did not fulfill the expectations of their
     sponsors.

Enjoy a good laugh.

Note: I am not posting this as an easy criticism about Lua in an Ada place  
; and there's no bad intentions from them with this sentence, which starts  
in such way it's clear it should not be taken literally (if all criticisms  
could be as funny as this one…).

-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University