Re: FOUR THE BEST LOGICIANS

From: Barb Knox (see_at_sig.below)
Date: 09/03/04 

Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 15:53:07 +1200

In article <ywmpt54gib4.fsf@fast.mm.homeunix.org>,
 N0SPAMmar@i.amRemove.16695.39767.invalid (MARco Munari) wrote:
[snip]

>If you can accept a more modern aproach, i add my specific point of view:
>Mathematics and Logic were basement for computer science,

Sort of. Those who actually built computers (such as Babbage, Aiken,
Eckhart and Mauchly) were primarily engineers rather than logicians or
mathematicians.

> and now some
>basements are opposite (science fields overlap), for so i want to mention
>-in sci.logic- Larry Wall
>(author/inventor of Perl,

Fac me cocleario vomere!

Perl's syntax IMO climbs to dizzying heights of inelegance, which no
logician would ever dream of.

> the first computer language and interpreter [snip incorrect comma] with

> pattern matching, recursive dynamic string interpretation,

Nope. SNOBOL was based entirely on string pattern matching, and LISP and
PROLOG support elegant recursive pattern matching and interpretation.

> associative data,

Nope. LISP, etc.

> widely used either for research and data communication interchange)

I very much doubt that Perl is used for any serious logic research.

>with many others

>Saluti,
>MARco Munari

No, I'm not really interested in participating in a computer-language
religious argument, but I just couldn't let those ignorant comments pass
unchallenged. 

-- 
---------------------------
|  BBB                b    \     Barbara at LivingHistory stop co stop uk
|  B  B   aa     rrr  b     |
|  BBB   a  a   r     bbb   |    Quidquid latine dictum sit,
|  B  B  a  a   r     b  b  |    altum viditur.
|  BBB    aa a  r     bbb   |   
-----------------------------