🚀 go-pugleaf

Robin Fairbairns said in article #6 of alt.lang.intercal:
> 
> 
> In article <sherman.715665672@foster>, sherman@unx.sas.com (Chris
> Sherman) writes:
> |> In <Bu2ov7.B4H@rice.edu> adam@owlnet.rice.edu (Adam Justin Thornton) writes:
> |> 
> |> >Of course, INTERCAL deals with Roman numbers in native mode.
> |> 
> |> Why?
> 
> Whyever not?  [just to pursue the silly follow-up style]
> --
> Robin (dump Brian Kay) Fairbairns                    rf@cl.cam.ac.uk
> U of Cambridge Computer Lab, Pembroke St, Cambridge  CB2 3QG, UK
> [Finally back in work - what a relief! - of course, University work is
>  probably permissible even if you _can_ program in Intercal (I can't,
>  despite a desultory attempt at doing so)]

Roman numerals make more sense than this new-fangled arabic
nonsense. They're commonly understood by all self-respecting
barbarian tribes, too. Note that for backward compatability
Intercal provides a Sanskrit translation mode as part of the
standard library.

Blatant Plug: if you live in the UK, look out for my review of
Intercal in the September issue of Computer Shopper magazine.
(Probably remaining on news-stands for another five minutes ...)


-- 
" -- next they'll nuke the Vatican so they can sell holy
     relics that glow in the dark."