Re: SAS to LUA conversion

[Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>]

On 24/06/2011 19.32, Lorenzo Donati wrote:
> On 24/06/2011 19.08, David Kastrup wrote:
> > "Joseph Manning"<manning@cs.ucc.ie> writes:
> >
> > > On 2011-Jun-24 (Fri) at 12:29 (+0100), Joseph Manning wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Naw, there's a much simpler explanation -- the original poster
> > > > > just had an unfortunate Lua Uppercase Accident :-)
> > >
> > > Umm ... it's probably rude to reply to myself, but maybe
> > >
> > > Lua Uppercase Acronym
> > >
> > > is a better, self-referential expansion of "LUA"
> >
> > I consider it worse since it misses out on the message "I am wrong", the
> > actually innovative part.
> I agree!
>
> Moreover, its seriousness could even convince someone that Lua is
> actually to be spelled LUA (urgh! cough! cough! :-D).
>
> You know, from the time of FORTRAN and BASIC, acronyms are like spells:
> yell it aloud (or litter your monthly report for the management with
> them) and all your problems magically go away :-)))
Warning: likely flamebait ahead! ;-)

Mmmh, just a thought: I begin suspecting that the most ugly languages in 
computing history had acronyms as names (not sure ... Your opinion is 
welcome! :-)

Compare:

FORTRAN, COBOL, BASIC, PHP, XML, HTML, SGML (as I was once told)

vs.

Pascal, Forth, Java, Lua :-) , Haskell (as I heard), Erlang (as I was 
told lately)


As for C and C++ ... well, they can be put in the middle ... :-)

-- Lorenzo