Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!scs!spl1!laidbak!att!pacbell!ames!oliveb!pyramid!prls!philabs!micomvax!ray
From: ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Modern languages (Slight return)
Message-ID: <1090@micomvax.UUCP>
Date: 2 Jun 88 15:53:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: micomvax.1090
References: <3292@enea.se> <2414@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU> <11671@ut-sally.UUCP> <12753@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Reply-To: ray@micomvax.UUCP (Ray Dunn)
Organization: Philips Electronics Ltd. (TDS - Montreal) St. Laurent QC, Canada
Lines: 25

In article <12753@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> gast@lanai.UUCP (David Gast) writes:
 [In response to Ed Nather's reference to Tony Hoare]
>
>You might also want to remember that his reviews of Algol 68 were
>notorious for misreprenting the truth.  For example, he would give an
>example of something that was terribly wrong with Algol 68; the
>only trouble was that his terrible example would be a syntactic
>error caught by the compiler.
>

Foul Play!

Does "he would give an example" actually mean "he gave (one) example" or, as
it implies, that he *habitually* did this.

Notorious to whom?  David Gast?  A particular section of the profession?
What are these examples?  Can we please be given enough *real* information
here to enable an *informed* conclusion to be drawn, and not just go off
into the boonies with hearsay??

-- 
Ray Dunn.                      |   UUCP: ..!{philabs, mnetor}!micomvax!ray
Philips Electronics Ltd.       |   TEL : (514) 744-8200   Ext: 2347
600 Dr Frederik Philips Blvd   |   FAX : (514) 744-6455
St Laurent. Quebec.  H4M 2S9   |   TLX : 05-824090