Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!pa.dec.com!e2big.mko.dec.com!nntpd.lkg.dec.com!tkou02.enet.dec.com!jit533!diamond
From: diamond@jit533.swstokyo.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: scheme [Re: What does an anti-perl look like]
Message-ID: <1991Jul1.011851.14666@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Date: 1 Jul 91 01:18:51 GMT
References: <4673@optima.cs.arizona.edu>
Sender: usenet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (USENET News System)
Reply-To: diamond@jit533.enet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
Lines: 23

In article <4673@optima.cs.arizona.edu> gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman) writes:
>In article  <2928.UUL1.3#5129@willett.pgh.pa.us> Doug Philips writes:
>>In article <4601@optima.cs.arizona.edu>,
>>>Definition: A "wrong syntax" is any syntax that is uncomfortable for
>>>the people using it.
>>No, it is "uncomfortable syntax."  (NOT (EQ 'Uncomfortable 'Wrong))
>>see also very last comment.
>
>People who choose which programming language to use are going to agree
>with my definition,

Yes.

>and are not usually going to choose a language with wrong syntax.

No.  I have to choose and use wrong syntaxes all the time, because languages
with the right syntaxes aren't properly implemented and/or missing a few
occasionally-needed features, and my employer won't let me build a language
with a less-wrong syntax.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@tkov50.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
Permission is granted to feel this signature, but not to look at it.