"Jerry Avins" <jya@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:XLGdnQv36Ipbid_anZ2dnUVZ_jqdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cr88192 wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> natural is not readable.
>> one can argue all they want that RPN is more natural, but that is not
>> what I am arguing here.
>
> You argue from your personal experience, and you apply it it others as a
> matter of course. Dose there being more Muslims than Christians make
Islam
> "natural"?
>
AFAIK, there are more Christians than Muslims...
but, what I am talking about is not what is "natural", but "generally
superior".
after all, what is most "natural" in religion?... probably that would be
animism or peganism.
and, though I have certain religious beliefs as well, religion is not the
topic here.
so, the question is not, which is more natural, but which is better...
>> I argue about readability, where I assert that C has the upper hand.
>> with C code, I can quickly scroll though some large source file and
have
>> a general idea how it works, not by any real mental processing, but by
>> appearance.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> so, yes, for example, one has to learn algebra, but this does not mean
it
>> is not worthwhile.
>>
>> x^2+y^2, absent defining x or y, can't be simplified further...
>
> What significance does that have? The representation may differ, but
> +[*(x,x),*(y.y)] can be simplified as much or as little as x^2+y^2. In
> exactly the same way that bigots do (and from a similar cause) you make
> refutable claims to sup****t an untenable position.
>
think conservatively...
if for no other reason than this, this is how things are.
is the 8 bit byte any more "natural" than a 12 bit one?...
yet, if someone suggests that the entire industry goes over to 12 bit
bytes,
we regard the person as uninformed...
if one understands conservativism, and gradual refinement, one may well
understand syntax...
> Jerry
> --
> Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
> ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
|
