Please direct all C+@-related followups to comp.lang.misc.

> this is insane.  there is no public information about the C+@ language
> on the internet.  ...  mention is made that C+@ is a great language.
> ... nothing concrete about the language itself is there.  no code
> samples, no language definition, nothing concrete to be looked at.  no
> way to evaluate Jim Fleming's claim that C+@ is a viable language.

The fact is, while C+@ might once have been a viable language, Jim
Fleming's postings have utterly and irrevocably destroyed its reputation
throughout the entire worldwide computer industry.  As a result, C+@ is
now certainly not a viable language.

Ok, maybe not a "fact", just my opinion.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Doug.Landauer@sun.com | "If I had never existed, would you still
 SunSoft->DevPro::    |  remember me ? " -- 1984 Blues,
  Languages.ADE(C++); |      the Austin Lounge Lizards