Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme,comp.lang.scheme.scsh,comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.tcl,comp.lang.functional,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.python,comp.lang.eiffel
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!goldenapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news.dfci.harvard.edu!camelot.ccs.neu.edu!news.mathworks.com!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news-peer.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!sprint!ix.netcom.com!hbaker
From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker)
Subject: Re: Reply to Ousterhout's reply (was Re: Ousterhout and Tcl ...)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Message-ID: <hbaker-0904971253290001@10.0.2.1>
Sender: hbaker@netcom6.netcom.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Organization: nil
X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0
References: <rcybba5k9c.fsf@redwood.skiles.gatech.edu> <s6y208um0ey.fsf_-_@aalh02.alcatel.com.au> <334412fb.7359993@news.demon.co.uk> <5i7euq$cmg@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> <5iafs1$fh4@roar.cs.utexas.edu> <334A650F.4D63@4mate.hr> <334B68EC.3F66@maths.anu.edu.au> <5ighvq$etn@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 20:53:29 GMT
Lines: 15
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.scheme:19436 comp.lang.scheme.scsh:547 comp.lang.lisp:26560 comp.lang.tcl:66104 comp.lang.functional:8732 comp.lang.c++:259752 comp.lang.perl.misc:73251 comp.lang.python:20731 comp.lang.eiffel:19452

In article <5ighvq$etn@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM>, ouster@tcl.eng.sun.com (John
Ousterhout) wrote:

> Sorry, but this doesn't really make sense.  For example, if "ugly languages"
> refers to Tcl or Perl or C++, none of these languages even existed in the
> 1970s.  In contrast, various flavors of Lisp have been around since at least
> the early 60's and Smalltalk first appeared in the late 60's.  Every single
> programmer who ever wrote a program in Tcl, Perl, C++, Visual Basic, or even
> C could have chosen Lisp, Scheme, or Smalltalk.  But they didn't.  If you
> want to know the truth, I think you need to stop making superficial excuses
> and ask deeper semantic questions.  There really is something better about
> each of these "ugly languages" that gives them an advantage over the "good"
> languages;  I'll leave it up to you to figure out what it is.

Strong hyping ??
