From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!raybed2!rgc
From: rgc@raybed2.msd.ray.com (RICK CARLE)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Which language missed DoD deadline and gave birth to Ada?
Summary: DELAY statement strikes again
Message-ID: <2076@raybed2.msd.ray.com>
Date: 1 Feb 91 13:44:08 GMT
References: <1991Jan31.095624.9034@resam.dk>
Organization: Raytheon Co., Tewksbury, Mass.
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <1991Jan31.095624.9034@resam.dk>, andrew@resam.dk (Leif Andrew Rump) writes:
> There was a (better - I was told) computer language that didn't make it
> to the deadline (they missed by one hour - I was (also) told because of
> a traffic jam). Could somebody please give me some more information.

This has got to be a joke.  Perhaps the other language shared Ada's
DELAY (till) statement.  Or perhaps John Goodenough planted this rumor
so he could ensure that Ada 9X allows rate monotonic scheduling.
Or maybe it's true?
	Rick Carle