Conversation

Replying to
I don't think that anybody claimed otherwise. For any definition of "good language". The paper appeals to me as an intuitive thinker. There are probably smart and capable people that would dismiss all this. That doesn't concern me in the slightest - take it or leave it.
1
Replying to
Thanks! Your views on C somehow seem relevant. The C standards committee is hell bent on making C more consistent in theory by making it inconsistent with reality. So clearly it's a mistake to dismiss empirical reality. Still, let's not make the opposite mistake somewhere else.
1
Show replies