[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The Highlander Principle

To: "Peter J. Wasilko, Esq." <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: The Highlander Principle
From: Steve Dekorte <address@hidden>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2003 13:13:01 -0700
Cc: address@hidden
In-reply-to: <r02000100-1026-E0B87850DF5911D7B934003065B28AFA@[168.100.204.225]>
References: <r02000100-1026-E0B87850DF5911D7B934003065B28AFA@[168.100.204.225]>
Sender: address@hidden


On Thursday, September 4, 2003, at 9:31 PM, Peter J. Wasilko, Esq. 
wrote:
>     This is why, in my humble opinion, the encoding redundancy of a 
> more
> verbose constrained natural language oriented notation offers superior
> comprehensibility and long term maintainability to terse mathematically
> oriented symbolic representations.

There have been many attempts at natural languages for programming. 
What would you consider to be the most successful of these?

-- Steve

References:
- The Highlander Principle
  - From: "Peter J. Wasilko, Esq." <futurist@cloud9.net>

Prev by Date: Re: why tail recursion matters
Next by Date: Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lisp performance was Re: problems with lisp
Previous by thread: The Highlander Principle
Next by thread: Re: why tail recursion matters and why Java isn't it, was Re: lisp performance was Re: problems with lisp
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread