Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: a comprehensible standard
Message-ID: <7193@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 29 Jan 88 18:46:14 GMT
References: <7072@brl-smoke.ARPA> <7160@brl-smoke.ARPA> <3932@hoptoad.uucp> <7181@brl-smoke.ARPA> <10345@mimsy.UUCP> <341@fig.bbn.com>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 12

In article <341@fig.bbn.com> rsalz@fig.bbn.com (Rich Salz) writes:
>In article <7181@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
>-The issue of difficulty in implementing the specifications correctly
>-doesn't bother me much. ...
>it's not just implementors who will need to understand it, ...

Ahh, I was responding to the difficulty-of-implementation issue,
not to the difficulty-of-understanding issue.  There is of course
some correlation between the two, but they are not the same issue.

I suspect even fewer people could provide a decent implementation
of Algol than of C, but I think it's easier to understand..