Re: Ada explanation?

[dobrien@seas.gwu.edu (David O'Brien)]

Norman H. Cohen (ncohen@watson.ibm.com) wrote:
: In article <1995Jan19.235443.25311@nosc.mil>, sampson@nosc.mil
: (Charles H. Sampson) writes: 

: |>      Does this document have any credence in the industry?  (I've never
: |> heard of it before, obviously.)  I certainly wouldn't peruse it for any
: |> other information, since the author/compiler seems to think that the
: |> most important piece of information is hackers' opinions.

: Correction:  Not hacker's opinions, but the author's unsupported
: assertions about what "hackers are nearly unamimous in observing".  I'd
: be willing to bet a month of involuntary servitude on a C++ project that
: he never conducted a survey.

Hummm...  In a way the author *has*.  This is a living document on
USENET.  Many, many people read it.  All are free to comment on it.
But, please do remember its origins -- the AI lab at MIT and SAIL at
Stanford.  In its origins it was a living and evolutionary document.
At this point, I think you'd be hard to say "author" when so many people
have contributed to it.  ESR simply compiles all the submissions.

-- David O'Brien	(dobrien@seas.gwu.edu)