From: no.email@nospam.invalid   
      
   albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl writes:   
   > It serves in my opinion that Jensen's is serependitious technique that   
   > is only used as there are no better techniques available.   
      
   It's pretty clear from Naur's article that Jensen's trick was   
   intentional rather than serependitious.  One can say retrospectively   
   that it was a mistake because there were better things they could have   
   done instead.  The committee was split on how to do it, and the wrong   
   side won.  Despite this error, Algol 60 is still highly regarded, so we   
   can say for a language designed by a committee, it did a very good job   
   even if one can take issue with some specifics.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)