Xref: utzoo comp.databases:2530 comp.lang.misc:2943
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!hafro!krafla!bjornb
From: bjornb@rhi.hi.is (Bjorn H Bjornsson)
Newsgroups: comp.databases,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: NATURAL. A LANGUAGE? A DBMS ? NEITHER?
Keywords: natural, adabas
Message-ID: <969@krafla.rhi.hi.is>
Date: 14 May 89 03:18:09 GMT
References: <85155A5V@PSUVM> <624@bloom.UUCP>
Reply-To: bjornb@rhi.hi.is (Bjorn H Bjornsson)
Organization: University of Iceland (RHI)
Lines: 26

In article <624@bloom.UUCP> bobd@bloom.UUCP (Bob Donaldson) writes:
>
> ...  As a programmer, I
>don't like the fact that it "protects" me from getting into trouble by 
>leaving features out.  A sampling of the most glaring ommissions - arrays
>and subroutines.

Not quite true.
Natural has been updated to Natural 2, which is a HUUUGE improvement over
version 1.  Nat 2 has among other things both arrays and subroutines
(which admittedly should of course have been included from the start).
As a programmer I don't like everything about it, but then I can always
find something to dislike in every language.
Nat2 with adabas and integrated documentation facilities etc., is actually
a very powerful package, and can be used to do anything anyone would
ever want a db to do.
Lower level programming with no protection is always availible through
external assembler/plI/etc routines.  

Bjorn

Disclaimer: 
   These are my opinions [but probably also those of my employer  =)  ]
-- 
Bjorn Heimir Bjornsson		Internet:  bjornb@rhi.hi.is
University of Iceland		UUCP:	   {mcvax,enea}!hafro!rhi!bjornb