Anachronisms ???

Anachronisms ???

[Judy.Bamberger]

   -- A prime example is Unix; the current POSIX effort aims to 
   -- standardize 1960's technology, thus resulting in a "lowest
   -- common denominator" which locks users into obsolescence.
   -- 
   -- Ada's problem with Unix is that Unix, being 1960's technology,
   -- does not properly support lightweight processes.  

What an odd thought ... a 1960s operating system underneath a 1970s
programming language used on 1980s contracts for systems to be
fielded in the 1990s and beyond!  Think about it ...

Re: Anachronisms ???

[Richard O'Keefe]

In article <8911161302.AA12584@fa.sei.cmu.edu>, Judy.Bamberger@SEI.CMU.EDU writes:
> What an odd thought ... a 1960s operating system underneath a 1970s
> programming language used on 1980s contracts for systems to be
> fielded in the 1990s and beyond!  Think about it ...

....thinking....thought.

What's really frightening about this is that the programs use a system of
numeration which is hundreds and hundreds of years old, and the comments
are usually written in an ambiguous language which is recognisable from
1200 years ago (some of the old "programs" can still be "interpreted" without
change...)

	Old != bad, New != good, Old != good, New != bad.

What happened to the Rational OS?