Re: a golden oldie challenge: Eliza

i'd rather say:  "programs (in L) should be readable by people (who know
L)."  i have no idea how
to determine absolute readability (except to require that the font-size be
within a certain range.)

"Dimitre Liotev" <notmy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:_qqdnckGTcUDG1zanZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Tarver <dr.mtarver@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:

> Sorry I missed a couple of later attempts
>
> Lisp 150 LOC ................ Peter Norvig
> Qi (slightly revised) 63 LOC .................Mark Tarver
> Ruby 53 LOC .................William James
> Q 10 LOC ..................Steven Apter
> K 3 LOC ...................Steven Apter
> Ruby (again)            17 LOC ...................William James
> Mathematica            20 LOC .................. Szabolcs
>
> Mark

So K wins the competition in brevity, but does the ability to squeeze
code into illegible character blobs say anything about the suitability
of a programming language for writing readable and understandable
programs? I'd rather follow the principle that "Programs must be written
for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute."...

-- 
Dimitre Liotev
(format t "~{~a~}" (reverse '("et" "n" "in." "a" "zn" "@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" "l" "d")))