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: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: William Clodius Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/02/08 Message-ID: <36BF2F9A.41C6@lanl.gov>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 442049223 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <77t3ld$nou$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79ce4s$lfq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79chc7$ko6@drn.newsguy.com> <79dodb$rhf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79fm3e$ffs$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79fnce$iv8@drn.newsguy.com> <79grbs$d5u$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79hujb$ck3@drn.newsguy.com> <79mvba$2qi$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <36BF2560.46E39E21@easystreet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Los Alamos National Lab Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java Date: 1999-02-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Al Christians wrote: > > Some week or two ago, in the discussion of Modula-2 that somehow spilled > into comp.lang.ada, a comment was repeated about the ISO library spec > for > M2 being bad enough to demise the language. If a bad library spec can > kill > a language, maybe a good one could help one at least a little. > I suspect you are paraphrasing me paraphrasing someone else, and not doing a good job of it. You seem to be combining two comments, that the library spec had a number of problems, and that the ISO standard document was bad enough to kill the language. There were many more problems with the document than just the library spec. The language of course is still alive, though not well in terms of growth of useage. For what its worth, some people felt that a smaller and simpler spec for the library would have been better. Just taking on more procedures without good thought is not a solution. -- William B. Clodius Phone: (505)-665-9370 Los Alamos Nat. Lab., NIS-2 FAX: (505)-667-3815 PO Box 1663, MS-C323 Group office: (505)-667-5776 Los Alamos, NM 87545 Email: wclodius@lanl.gov