> flexible Flexibility is good for frameworks, not for languages. I read once a list of good and bad adjectives applied to paintings by Chinese painter Shi Ta

> flexible Flexibility is good for frameworks, not for languages. I read once a list of good and bad adjectives applied to paintings by Chinese painter Shi Tao. In the same vein here is my list for our topic. Good computer languages are: - Expressive, readable, memorisable, deterministic, stiff, simple, obvious, clear, concise, precise, sharp, smooth, pedestrian, regular, parsable. Bad computer languages are: - Obscure, arduous, terse, stark, viscous, flexible, lumpy, bumpy, redundant, verbose, restrictive, poetic, foolish, extravagant, awkward. (This is not to be take too seriously, but just this: all built-in "flexibility" in languages leads to nightmares)