Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!seismo!mimsy!eneevax!umd5!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re:  The C Language
Message-ID: <5903@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 28-May-87 21:45:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.5903
Posted: Thu May 28 21:45:32 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 30-May-87 11:26:58 EDT
References: <8705281733.AA27424@renoir.Berkeley.EDU>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 14

In article <8705281733.AA27424@renoir.Berkeley.EDU> samples@RENOIR.BERKELEY.EDU (A. Dain Samples) writes:
>Develop a language that solves the programming-in-the-large problems, and
>THEN we can have a meaningful, resolvable argument!

Thanks for a good article.
There is a widespread misconception that the proper programming
(or meta-programming) language would solve all our problems.
In fact, problems are solved by people thinking about them and
getting good ideas, not by mechanical methods (except for a few
especially boring classes of problems, or as AIDS for people
solving problems).
Programming language design can assist or hinder development of
proper computer solutions, but as you observe that's not the
really hard part.