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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Bertrand Meyer Subject: Re: Is there a language that Dijkstra liked? (was: Re: Software landmines (loops)) Date: 1998/10/11 Message-ID: <3620FA1A.AC761584@eiffel.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 399997240 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6rf59b$2ud$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6rfra4$rul$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35DBDD24.D003404D@calfp.co.uk> <6sbuod$fra$1@hirame.wwa.com> <904556531.666222@miso.it.uq.edu.au> <6sgror$je8$3@news.indigo.ie> <6sh3qn$9p2$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6simjo$jnh$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35eeea9b.2174586@news.erols.com> <6sjj7n$3rr$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35f055a5.1431187@news.erols.com> <6sjnlu$83l$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6skfs7$2s6$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35F252DD.5187538@earthlink.net> <6t4dge$t8u$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6t5mtp$4ho$1@news.indigo.ie> <35FFE58C.5727@ibm.net> <3600E72E.24C93C94@cl.cam.ac.uk> <6ts1q0$vo2$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> To: Matthew Heaney Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Interactive Software Engineering Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: Bertrand.Meyer@eiffel.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1998-10-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I'd like to clear up the chronology and Hoare references. Matthew Heaney wrote: > > dewarr@my-dejanews.com [I assume this is Robert Dewar but couldn't find a confirmation -- BM] > writes: > !! [...] Perhaps you are talking about AH's [I assume this is Tony Hoare -- BM] > !! Turing address, which > !! certainly did not "kill interest on Ada in the academic > !! community" [...] [Tony Hoare] did > !! also write a nice [foreword] for a book by Brian Wichman. [Matthew Heaney:] > I have to disagree with you, Robert. It is my opinion that it was > Hoare's Turing Award speech that single-handedly derailed the Ada > language effort. He essentially argued that by using Ada, "the fate of > mankind" was at stake. > [...] > It's the kind of thing that probably prompted C.B. Jones to remark that: > > "Subsequent to this publication, Hoare and Wirth consulted for SRI on > their 'Yellow' language response to the 'Tinman' requirements. Their > consistent advice to simplify even this language was unheeded - but the > final Ada language (the 'Green' proposal) was even more baroque." > > (excerpted from Chap 13, "Hints on programming language design", in > Essays in Computing Science, by Hoare and Jones). > > In his speech, Hoare argued that "Ada was doomed to succeed." [...] What is not clear is that you are talking about two separate papers from Hoare. The remark by C.B. Jones is in chapter 13 of his collection of Hoare papers (Essays in Computing Science, edited by Hoare and Jones, Prentice Hall). This is the paper entitled "Hints on Programming Language Design", dating back to 1973 (although the version republished in the book is from 1974). The Turing lecture ("The Emperor's Old Clothes", chapter 1 in the Hoare-Jones collection), which contains the strongly critical comments on Ada, including the "doomed to success" remark, is quite posterior: 1980. I have no doubt Mr. Heaney understands this, but the above extract is unfortunate: if you haven't read the book, then when you see Cliff Jones's comment cited above ("Subsequent to this publication, Hoare and Wirth consulted for [the] Yellow language"), you will almost certainly think that it implies the consulting was "subsequent to the Turing lecture of 1980", whereas Jones of course meant "subsequent to the 1973 paper 'Hints on Programming Language Design'". So the chronology is: 1973: Paper on "Hints on Programming Language Design" (revised 74). 1975-1978 (approximate dates): Hoare consults on the "Yellow" language proposal. 1978 (I think): DoD chooses "Green" and "Red" languages as finalists. 1978-1979 (or 1980): Hoare consults for the Green team (Jean Ichbiah). 1980: DoD chooses Green as the winning language design for Ada. 1980: Hoare's Turing lecture, "The Emperor's Old Clothes", includes strongly critical comments on Ada. By the way, whatever you think of Ada and Hoare's 1980 view of it, which occupy only a few paragraphs towards the end of the article, "The Emperor's Old Clothes" should be required reading in any computing science curriculum. (When you write something like that someone is bound to ask: "Where do I find the full text on the Web?". So I ran a search but the only copy I found is on the home page of a graduate student and doesn't say whether the copy is authorized, so I am not publishing the URL here. Suffice it to say that I found it on Sunday morning PDT by running the query "Hoare emperor's old clothes Ada" at Highway61. In any case any university library will have Communications of the ACM, vol. 24, no. 2, February 1981, pp. 75-83, where the paper first appeared, and probably the Hoare-Jones volume as well.) -- Bertrand Meyer, Interactive Software Engineering ISE Building, 2nd Floor, 270 Storke Road Goleta, CA 93117 USA 805-685-1006, Fax 805-685-6869, , http://eiffel.com