Re: [LogoForum] Logo: Tests for compliance.

Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>If you allow for variations in syntax and diffent spelling is
>Pop11 a Logo?

Primitive names in different (human) languages are a long-accepted Logo
tradition, although that doesn't at all solve the problem that Logo
programs
are /grammatically/ wrong in (human) languages other than English because
of
inflection, etc.

But pop11 had a different design philosophy.  I think it would actually be
an insult to Robin Popplestone for us to claim it as a Logo!  We mustn't
fall into the trap of thinking every good language has to be under our
tent,
not even every good language for kids.

>This still begs language questions: is dynamic (or maybe lexical) scope
>natural?  Does case insensitivity makes things easier?  Does making
>newlines special help?

I agree, these are the sorts of questions that really shape what Logo is,
along with others about application areas (like turtle graphics), error
messages, immediate-mode features (like paint programs), etc.