John Halleck wrote:
> > And you consider this a model to be emulated?
>
> Yes. I've seen it produce good results.
Just because we might use a model in which several versions
are discussed and debated is no reason that has to
lead to excess and unnessary debate. I think it could actually
help to frame and focus the debate.
> > Are you old enough to remember the genesis of ADA, when it was called
> > Green?
>
> Yes, I'm old enough. (I first started programming in 1968.)
> I still have the Green manual at home.
>
> > When Strawman and Tinman had nothing to do with the Wizard of Oz?
Nothing to do with Wizard of Oz? Sure I believe you. :-)
> Yes. I remember this. I gather from your comments that you
> expected otherwise.
Certainly a series of nested elements and attributes is
very much simplier than a large programming language like ADA,
which was playing around with integrating many complex ideas.
So even if we dragged along for a year at your
'5 year' rate we'd be more than done.
FWIW, looking up at a nearby shelf, I can see ADA-Rational (written
on the spine in John Halleck's hand), which I picked up from John
at some point. This is SIGPlan Notices June 1979.
Have fun,
-Paul
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 18:00:00 CEST