From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) Date: 2002-09-07T23:24:55+09:00 Subject: Re: Ruby aesthetics Hi, In message "Re: Ruby aesthetics" on 02/09/07, paul@prescod.net writes: |> That's the point. I guess you don't have any problem of equivalence |> with your language (in this case, English). | |I am never happy with natural language metaphors for computer languages. |Natural languages are HARD to learn (ask Larry Wall about Japanese!). |Computer languages should strive to be much easier. Natural languages have |many ambiguities in them. Computer languages must drive the ambiguities |out. The rules defining natural languages are so complicated that |linguists can't agree on them. I do agree with the aspect of natural language you stated. But still, my point about brain bits is unrelated with the aspect. I was talking about alternatives in languages, not ambiguities. matz.