From: horst@pcsbst.UUCP (horst)
Subject: Re: pro Ada argument?
Date: 22 Dec 89 18:05:48 GMT [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1178@pcsbst.UUCP> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 629649952.9223@minster.york.ac.uk
In article <629649952.9223@minster.york.ac.uk> forsyth@minster.york.ac.uk writes:
> Horst Kern reports a novel approach to software engineering: let the
> lawyers do it. What a good way of settling technical arguments! (See
Okay, I can see the problem: Even though everyone was called to
participate in the Ada effort, some people - like Edsgar Dijkstra -
have given their reasons for repelling all three language proposals
and are now hoping that the Russians will use Ada too. (He made this
statement 6 years ago so it is perhaps not up to date any more.)
The current discussion makes it evident that the laws (again this word
which is so much disliked) of nature have not yet been discovered in
computer science. So I think it is a good discussion and nobody should
tell Ted Holdon to shut up.
Best regards,
Horst
prev parent reply other threads:[~1989-12-22 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1989-12-04 13:04 pro Ada argument? horst
1989-12-09 18:43 ` Ada, 1992, and Product Responsibility William Thomas Wolfe, 2847
1989-12-30 5:04 ` Metafont Consultant Account
1989-12-14 14:45 ` pro Ada argument? forsyth
1989-12-22 18:05 ` horst [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox