Larry Wall: > I can see the mathematical appeal of coming up with a language in > which there is a meaning for every possible combination of tokens.
Yes, that sounds like my language. I agree it's not Perl. And not a lot of other things too.<g> > It's a counterintuitive fact > that languages that are too efficiently coded induce inefficiencies in > communication. Many of us will experience that every day, for example when telling somebody what to do and how to do it. > We're already dancing on the brink of "too efficient", > and it would be easy to fall over the edge. Some would say we already > have... I know some. As a coincidence I am working on a project in which we remove topping layers from texts, to deduce a (quite artificial) skeleton from each text. This to make it possible to find and define relations between the texts. We use the skeleton-format also to link to very different data, like to parts of scanned images of the same kind of texts, to sound bytes, etc. -- Grtz, Ruud
