Gary Fisher wrote:

> I'm a great fan of Arthur C. Clarke, but the statement referred to 
> here fell short of his abilities. Reduced, it states that anything 
> which meets the criteria of the statement will indeed meet the 
> criteria of the statement. In this corollary, any programming language 
> which is indistinguishable from Smalltalk will be indistinguishable 
> from Smalltalk. Ya think? <g>

= but not == :-)
Karl

>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Alan Lovejoy <mailto:squeak-dev.sourcery at forum-mail.net>
>     *To:* squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
>     <mailto:squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>     *Sent:* Saturday, July 16, 2005 3:23 PM
>     *Subject:* Any sufficiently advanced...
>
>     “Any sufficiently advanced programming language will be
>     indistinguishable from Smalltalk.” -- with apologies to Arthur C.
>     Clarke.
>
>     I ran across a quote from Donald Raab just now, and it inspired me
>     to think of the above variation on Clarke’s famous dictum.
>
>     Here’s what Raab said: "Any sufficiently complicated Java or VB
>     program contains an ad-hoc, informally-specified bug-ridden slow
>     implementation of half of Smalltalk."
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> avast! Antivirus <http://www.avast.com>: Outbound message clean.
>
> Virus Database (VPS): 0528-5, 07/15/2005
> Tested on: 7/16/05 3:52:41 PM
> avast! is copyright (c) 2000-2004 ALWIL Software.
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>  
>