ambiguous ?

[Jim Giles]

>From article <11337 at smoke.BRL.MIL>, by gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn):
> [...]
> The looseness in the C language definition is deliberate,
> because C was designed for systems programming,

It seems to me that systems programming is exactly the context
where "looseness" is least tolerable.  A system failure may
effect hundreds (even thousands) of users.  The cost in user
time as well as information may be enormous.  Systems programming
is the one context in which I would insist upon the _most_
unambiguously designed language available.