Comments, with reply on `Third-generation versus fourth-generationsoftware development'' by S. Misra and P. Jalics

The computer argues that the conclusion to be drawn from the above mentioned article (see ibid., vol.5, no.4, p.8-14, July 1988), that there is no need for fourth-generation languages and no advantage in using them is questionable. He considers the experimental setup in the July article questionable and raises a number of substantive questions about it. The authors reply that there is no suggestion in their article that fourth-generation languages are not needed, but that they are not prepared to accept any tool as a fourth-generation language just because it is labeled as such. They respond to each of the commenter's points and propose a necessary condition of a fourth-generation language