[jimmyhmiller]

I think all papers are flawed in their own way. So it is not meant as a slight. It is actually my favorite programming related paper. That said:

I think Naur was just a bit to vague and assumed background knowledge of Gilbert Ryle where most people don't have any. I think a lot of people finish reading the paper and don't realize what Naur's notion of theory is or how his radical conclusions follow.

[fghfghfghfghfgh]

I don’t know Gilbert Ryle but I believe I understand the paper as intended.

What do they realize then instead?