Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!noao!arizona!gudeman From: gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: The Universal Language (Was Re: Efficient Fortran) Message-ID: <24044@megaron.cs.arizona.edu> Date: 8 Aug 90 21:09:31 GMT Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson Lines: 25 In article mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (Real Amigas have keyboard garages) Meyer) writes: >[about the Universal Language] >In both cases, Mr. Gudeman could be describing LISP. It's grown and >changed over time. While such a system could well provide a universal >language, the current state of the world suggests that such a system >isn't an improvement over a multitude of special purpose languages. I'm willing to admit that Lisp does not provide a solution the problem of making a universal language. Part of the problem is the limited scope of paradigms that Lisp allows. Another problem is that the syntax is not convenient for many purposes. However Lisp systems, like Unix, have proven extremely powerful and versatile, and may give an idea for the direction we want to look in. Also, in my usage, just because everyone doesn't use a language that doesn't prove that it isn't universal. English is fairly universal as a means of expression but it's not universal in the sense that everyone speaks it. When I say "universal" I'm refering to the first sense, that it is adequate for most purposes of expression, not that it is actually used by everyone. -- David Gudeman Department of Computer Science The University of Arizona gudeman@cs.arizona.edu Tucson, AZ 85721 noao!arizona!gudeman