Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!asente
From: asente@decwrl.UUCP (Paul Asente)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: Anti-CLU... Anti-Strong-Typing...
Message-ID: <4466@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 6-Dec-83 18:54:53 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.4466
Posted: Tue Dec  6 18:54:53 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 9-Dec-83 02:24:25 EST
References: <4211@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: DEC Western Research Lab, Los Altos, CA
Lines: 17

I find that CLU is my language of choice for writing programs.  If I
had anything to say about it, I'd never use anything else.  (Well...
almost never)

When I'm writing a CLU cluster to implement something or other, it
almost always turns out that with just a little bit more effort I get
something that is several times more general.  Like some other
contributor to this debate, I also find the only thing I can think of
to be concerned about with CLU is the question of whether assignments
are really efficient.

When people complain about strong typing, it seems to me that what they
really are objecting to is the weak functionality that goes with it in
languages like Pascal and, yes, Modula-2.

	-paul asente
	    decwrl!asente