:-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

:-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[John Herro]

2000-April-01
-------------
Let's face it: the popularity of Ada is declining.  To solve this problem,
Software Innovations Technology has invented a brand new language!  It's
enough like Ada to have most of Ada's advantages, but different enough that
people won't recognize it as Ada.  We plan to call our brand new language
"Just Another Version of Ada."  (Unfortunately, the similarites and
differences between the two languages will be very confusing for any poor
soul who tries to learn both languages!)

Applets written in Just Another Version of Ada will enable web surfers to do
many wonderful things.  For example, here's some very exciting news!  Thanks
to Just Another Version of Ada, you'll be able to search through the entire
world, looking for web sites that offer "Beans."  After you've collected
about a million Beans, you'll be able to exchange them for great prizes,
such as our own Fabulous Ada Requirements Tester!

Just Another Version of Ada should revolutionize the Internet!  Since our
brand new language is so earth shaking, be sure to forward this posting to
everybody you know.  Heck, for that matter, forward this posting to
everybody you DON'T know! :)

- John Herro
Software Innovations Technology

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Keith Thompson]

"Marin D. Condic" <mcondic-nospam@quadruscorp.com> writes:
> Marin D. Condic wrote:
> > 
> > O.K. Pretty clever for 1/4/00.
> Ooopss! I meant 4/1/00 - or better yet 1-Apr-00. :-)

You mean 2000-04-01?  (See ISO-8601.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Welcome to the last year of the 20th century.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[G]

Acrostics rock.
:-)

John Herro wrote:

> 2000-April-01
> -------------
> Let's face it: the popularity of Ada is declining.  To solve this problem,
> Software Innovations Technology has invented a brand new language!  It's
> enough like Ada to have most of Ada's advantages, but different enough that
> people won't recognize it as Ada.  We plan to call our brand new language
> "Just Another Version of Ada."  (Unfortunately, the similarites and
> differences between the two languages will be very confusing for any poor
> soul who tries to learn both languages!)
>
> Applets written in Just Another Version of Ada will enable web surfers to do
> many wonderful things.  For example, here's some very exciting news!  Thanks
> to Just Another Version of Ada, you'll be able to search through the entire
> world, looking for web sites that offer "Beans."  After you've collected
> about a million Beans, you'll be able to exchange them for great prizes,
> such as our own Fabulous Ada Requirements Tester!
>
> Just Another Version of Ada should revolutionize the Internet!  Since our
> brand new language is so earth shaking, be sure to forward this posting to
> everybody you know.  Heck, for that matter, forward this posting to
> everybody you DON'T know! :)
>
> - John Herro
> Software Innovations Technology

--
----------------------------------------------------------------


G.M. Wallace
Australia


----------------------------------------------------------------

"They paved paradise, put up a parking lot."
                                           ~  Joni Mitchell

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Bryce Bardin]

"Marin D. Condic" wrote:
> 
> Marin D. Condic wrote:
> >
> > O.K. Pretty clever for 1/4/00.
> Ooopss! I meant 4/1/00 - or better yet 1-Apr-00. :-)
> 
> MDC

It looks like we still haven't learned the Y2K lesson :-(.
Why are people so allergic to 2000?

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Marin D. Condic]

O.K. Pretty clever for 1/4/00. 

Actually though, you could see a lot of the anti-Ada bigotry go away if
the language were to be changed a little bit for appearances, then
backed by some large computer-industry vendor under another name.
Imagine if Mr. Gates decided that if Sun could have a language of their
own, then Micro$oft shouldn't be deprived of a suitable incompatible
alternative. Call the language "Countess" or something and market it as
the MS alternative to Java. The beauty of it is that most of the
technical work is already done.

Just an idea that might fly. Anybody got Bill Gates' e-mail address? ;-)

MDC

John Herro wrote:
> 
> 2000-April-01
> -------------
> Let's face it: the popularity of Ada is declining.  To solve this problem,
> Software Innovations Technology has invented a brand new language!  It's
> enough like Ada to have most of Ada's advantages, but different enough that
> people won't recognize it as Ada.  We plan to call our brand new language
> "Just Another Version of Ada."  (Unfortunately, the similarites and
> differences between the two languages will be very confusing for any poor
> soul who tries to learn both languages!)
> 
> Applets written in Just Another Version of Ada will enable web surfers to do
> many wonderful things.  For example, here's some very exciting news!  Thanks
> to Just Another Version of Ada, you'll be able to search through the entire
> world, looking for web sites that offer "Beans."  After you've collected
> about a million Beans, you'll be able to exchange them for great prizes,
> such as our own Fabulous Ada Requirements Tester!
> 
> Just Another Version of Ada should revolutionize the Internet!  Since our
> brand new language is so earth shaking, be sure to forward this posting to
> everybody you know.  Heck, for that matter, forward this posting to
> everybody you DON'T know! :)
> 
> - John Herro
> Software Innovations Technology

-- 
=============================================================
Marin David Condic   - Quadrus Corporation -   1.800.555.3393
1015-116 Atlantic Boulevard, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
http://www.quadruscorp.com/
m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m

***PLEASE REMOVE THE "-NOSPAM" PART OF MY RETURN ADDRESS***

Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"Because that's where they keep the money."
    --  Willie Sutton when asked why he robbed banks. 
=============================================================

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Marin D. Condic]

Marin D. Condic wrote:
> 
> O.K. Pretty clever for 1/4/00.
Ooopss! I meant 4/1/00 - or better yet 1-Apr-00. :-)

MDC

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Dale Stanbrough]

Keith Thompson wrote:

> You mean 2000-04-01?  (See ISO-8601.)

It's a good thing the Roman Empire wasn't using ISO-8601 in the
years 1..31 AD! (Mind you, this could be a problem for historians).

(what? is this off topic? :-)

Dale

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[G]

Dale Stanbrough wrote:

> Keith Thompson wrote:
>
> > You mean 2000-04-01?  (See ISO-8601.)
>
> It's a good thing the Roman Empire wasn't using ISO-8601 in the
> years 1..31 AD! (Mind you, this could be a problem for historians).
>
> (what? is this off topic? :-)
>
> Dale

Mind you - it's only the Americans (AFAIK) who put the month before the
day like that, 4/1/00, whereas here in Australia we use the British
(European?)
form of Day/Month/Year... which seems to make so much more sense in
terms on linear
continuity, or progressive scale-increments... I have noticed that in a
book on Assembler
that when dates were packed as records they were packed as
month/day/year which obviously doesn't matter but is just a *chortle*
fine example of American Techno-Imperialism... like HTML COLOR argh - I
mean... COLOUR thankyou very much... but that doesn't work...
*sigh*


G.
*an off-topic bullseye awaiting a flame-thrower*

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[David Starner]

On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 18:45:13 +1000, G <gmw@interact.net.au> wrote:
>fine example of American Techno-Imperialism... like HTML COLOR argh - I
>mean... COLOUR thankyou very much... but that doesn't work...
>*sigh*

COLOUR has nothing to recommend it from a technical standpoint -
it uses an extra letter, increasing bandwith use, and if used
in addition to COLOR, it complicates every HTML reader out there.

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Only a nerd would worry about wrong parentheses with
square brackets. But that's what mathematicians are.
   -- Dr. Burchard, math professor at OSU

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Robert Dewar]

In article <38E7924F.FD170A14@quadruscorp.com>,
  "Marin D. Condic" <mcondic-nospam@quadruscorp.com> wrote:
> Keith Thompson wrote:
> > You mean 2000-04-01?  (See ISO-8601.)
> >
> That's a much prettier format for any data processing
> considerations.

True, but it is ugly for humans, and as you (Marin) pointed
out, newsgroup articles are for human consumption :-)

Note incidentally that the "windowing" technique for dealing
with the Y2K problem is precisely an attempt to do what a human
does on encountering a two digit date, i.e. to use context to
resolve which century it is in.







Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[David Botton]

It worked for Delphi (aka Pascal) and pro/sql for Oracle (Ada SQL script).

DB


Richard D Riehle wrote in message <8c64ni$9m3$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>...
>I recall a meeting during the days of Ada 9X when someone suggested we
>adopt an entirely different appelation, "The Tucker," for the revised
>Ada standard.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Brian Rogoff]

On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, G wrote:
> blah

and then 

> blah blah

and finally

> blah blah blah blah

finishing with

> month/day/year which obviously doesn't matter but is just a *chortle*
> fine example of American Techno-Imperialism... like HTML COLOR argh - I
> mean... COLOUR thankyou very much... but that doesn't work...

So I take it you don't like "Initialize" and "Finalize" either due to the
fact that Americans spell those words correctly while the British and
other POHMs adopt that incorrect Francophile suffix? 

> G.
> *an off-topic bullseye awaiting a flame-thrower*

Happy to oblige, and incidentally bring the trolling back to Ada :-)

-- Brian 

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <38e56e47@excalibur.gbmtech.net>,
	"John Herro" <john@prousa.net> wrote:

>2000-April-01
>-------------
>Let's face it: the popularity of Ada is declining.  To solve this problem,
>Software Innovations Technology has invented a brand new language!  It's
>enough like Ada to have most of Ada's advantages, but different enough that
>people won't recognize it as Ada.  We plan to call our brand new language
>"Just Another Version of Ada."  (Unfortunately, the similarites and
>differences between the two languages will be very confusing for any poor
>soul who tries to learn both languages!)

I recall a meeting during the days of Ada 9X when someone suggested we
adopt an entirely different appelation, "The Tucker," for the revised
Ada standard.  

Richard Riehle

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Marin D. Condic]

Bryce Bardin wrote:
> 
> "Marin D. Condic" wrote:
> >
> > Marin D. Condic wrote:
> > >
> > > O.K. Pretty clever for 1/4/00.
> > Ooopss! I meant 4/1/00 - or better yet 1-Apr-00. :-)
> >
> > MDC
> 
> It looks like we still haven't learned the Y2K lesson :-(.
> Why are people so allergic to 2000?

Ahhhhh! That is because we humans do not process information in the same
way as computers do, Grasshopper. :-)

In newsgroup postings I anticipate either human readers or someone's
artificial intelligence experiment. Humans would never make the
presumption that I meant anything except 2000. The information is
context sensitive and the human mind understands the meaning of the
symbol. If someone's AI experiment can't deal with it, they need to go
back to the drawing board. :-)

MDC
-- 
=============================================================
Marin David Condic   - Quadrus Corporation -   1.800.555.3393
1015-116 Atlantic Boulevard, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
http://www.quadruscorp.com/
m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m

***PLEASE REMOVE THE "-NOSPAM" PART OF MY RETURN ADDRESS***

Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"Because that's where they keep the money."
    --  Willie Sutton when asked why he robbed banks. 
=============================================================

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Marin D. Condic]

Keith Thompson wrote:
> You mean 2000-04-01?  (See ISO-8601.)
> 
That's a much prettier format for any data processing considerations.

MDC

-- 
=============================================================
Marin David Condic   - Quadrus Corporation -   1.800.555.3393
1015-116 Atlantic Boulevard, Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
http://www.quadruscorp.com/
m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m

***PLEASE REMOVE THE "-NOSPAM" PART OF MY RETURN ADDRESS***

Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"Because that's where they keep the money."
    --  Willie Sutton when asked why he robbed banks. 
=============================================================

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[John Herro]

Wow!  I never thought I'd start a long thread with an April 1 posting making
fun of Java and Beenz!

FWIW, we might get away with writing the year in two digits now, but that's
going to get REALLY confusing starting in 2001.  The date 01/02/03 can be
interpreted at least three different ways: D/M/Y, M/D/Y, Y/M/D.  The ISO
standard specifies 2000-04-01, but I think 2000-April-01 or 2000-Apr-01 is
just as unambiguous and easier to read.

- John Herro
http://members.aol.com/AdaTutor

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Georg Bauhaus]

Marc A. Criley (marc.a.criley@lmco.com) wrote:

: From time to time I have idly thought about recasting the Ada syntax
: into a C++/Java style.  
: Then float an IPO, sit back, and
: watch it take the world by storm.
: Well, it's a daydream anyway...   :-)

Given how vivid and engaged discussions become when syntax is
involved (cf. colour/color etc. in this thread),  this is a major
issue wrt marketing, which is largely controlled by group
norms/fashions/..., not only rational judgement (if that exists
at all). Why else should there be, as recruiting people seem to think,
a large number of "experienced"
C<++> 98! programmers, (see M.D.Condic in this thread), when there aren't?

As an illustration, over here in Germany a few million kids in
the north will have to learn "old orthography" rules due to the
efforts of a small group of propagandists (term justified(*)) to
not adopt the new rules, adopted recently by everyone else.
The new rules were a result of a years
lasting standardisation effort including representatives from
Austria, Switzerland, and Germany. It is a compromise. Now think
of the children (and foreigners) having to learn how to write
German /old style for Schleswig-Holstein (the north west) and
/new style for everywhere else (two sets of schoolbooks, official
documents, ...).  More recent attempts to achieve the same goal
(not adopting) in other areas after the adoption have failed.

More often than not it turnes out that the most engaged
disputants have not familiarized them with the goals.
And they never answer questions like
- where and when is correct orthography essential/useful/unimportant?
- what exactely *are* the rules?
- what do those people say who have to learn to write the language?
Sounds familiar?

(*) One "argument" that slipped most journalists' attention was
"estimating" the number of changes per page including the
relatively frequent &szlig; |--> ss transition. The argument had
"more than thousand little changes on a page" in it --now how
many words per page are there, in a novel,say?  A factor of 10
just slippd...

- Georg Bauhaus

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Robert Dewar]

In article <8c9saa$j79$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
  Magnus Larsson <mla_mla@my-deja.com> wrote:
> Although the format "00-04-01" is more common.


Indeed! I have never seen the form 2000-04-01 in standard
Swedish correspondence, although 00 is odd enough that perhaps
it encourages a change :-)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Robert Dewar]

In article <38e8ab71$1@excalibur.gbmtech.net>,
  "John Herro" <john@prousa.net> wrote:
> but I think 2000-April-01 or 2000-Apr-01 is
> just as unambiguous and easier to read.


Yes, and Esperanto is easier to read than English :-)

Computer people always like to try to change common
usage in this way, but it won't work. The full
form

April 3, 2000

is still perfectly clear, and is actually the most
common usage in many countries. I do not think you
are about to change that :-)

The US 4/3/2000 is simply to be understood as short
hand for this longer form.

As always, the format is not that critical, like
endianness, it is the lack of a common standard that
causes trouble.

By the way, the idiot customs department in the US
uses the European style for dates. naturally most
americans fill out the form wrong :-)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Charles Hixson]

Personally, I prefer year-month-day.

G wrote:

> Dale Stanbrough wrote:
>
> > Keith Thompson wrote:

  --  snip

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Robert Dewar]

In article
<Pine.BSF.4.21.0004022134500.21092-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>,
  Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Apr 2000, G wrote:
> So I take it you don't like "Initialize" and "Finalize" either
> due to the fact that Americans spell those words correctly
> while the British and other POHMs adopt that incorrect
> Francophile suffix?

Actually the OED only permits the "z" spelling for such words.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Magnus Larsson]

In article <8c8016$iqk$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <38E7924F.FD170A14@quadruscorp.com>,
> "Marin D. Condic" <mcondic-nospam@quadruscorp.com> wrote:
> > Keith Thompson wrote:
> > > You mean 2000-04-01? (See ISO-8601.)
> > >
> > That's a much prettier format for any data processing
> > considerations.
>
> True, but it is ugly for humans, and as you (Marin) pointed
> out, newsgroup articles are for human consumption :-)
>
[..]
Well, you have just declared that we have no taste in Sweden. :-)
Although the format "00-04-01" is more common.
/Magnus
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Marc A. Criley]

From time to time I have idly thought about recasting the Ada syntax
into a C++/Java style.  The name for the language could be "Babbage",
or maybe "Babs" to convey that tanned, wired-in, mobile hacker on the
beach persona.  Anyhow.

A program written in Babbage would go through a front-end to do the
hopefully minimal syntax rearrangement, feed it into an Ada 95
back end, trap and "translate" any warning or error messages, and
generate object code when appropriate.

I'd start a company to proselytize this new high-security object
oriented language that includes built-in templates, exceptions,
concurrency, and type safety.  Then float an IPO, sit back, and
watch it take the world by storm.

I mean, hey, look at what you can start with as an initial mapping:

package     => package (thanks Java!)
tagged      => class (inheritable)
record      => struct (non-inheritable)
task        => thread
begin/end   => {/}
type        => typedef
exception/  => exception/
  when ...  =>   catch ...
private     => protected

procedure   => void proc-name(...)
function    => return-type func-name(...)

etc.

The nice thing is that you don't have to find an exact match in
existing C++/Java syntax, you can make something up if you really
need to, thereby ensuring it'll cleanly map back.

Well, it's a daydream anyway...   :-)

Marc A. Criley



David Botton wrote:
> 
> It worked for Delphi (aka Pascal) and pro/sql for Oracle (Ada SQL script).
> 
> DB
> 
> Richard D Riehle wrote in message <8c64ni$9m3$1@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>...
> >I recall a meeting during the days of Ada 9X when someone suggested we
> >adopt an entirely different appelation, "The Tucker," for the revised
> >Ada standard.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Karel Thoenissen]

Robert Dewar schreef:

> In article <38e8ab71$1@excalibur.gbmtech.net>,
>   "John Herro" <john@prousa.net> wrote:
> > but I think 2000-April-01 or 2000-Apr-01 is
> > just as unambiguous and easier to read.
>
> Yes, and Esperanto is easier to read than English :-)
>
> Computer people always like to try to change common
> usage in this way, but it won't work. The full
> form
>
> April 3, 2000
>
> is still perfectly clear, and is actually the most
> common usage in many countries. I do not think you
> are about to change that :-)

Name, say, three countries not being anglosaxon that use this format.

>
> The US 4/3/2000 is simply to be understood as short
> hand for this longer form.

It is ambiguous in almost every continental European country I know.

>
> As always, the format is not that critical, like
> endianness, it is the lack of a common standard that
> causes trouble.

It is critical in international communications, say in e-commerce.

>
> By the way, the idiot customs department in the US
> uses the European style for dates. naturally most
> americans fill out the form wrong :-)
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.

As usual Americans have a perverted view in these matters. Have they
already reached a standard on the use of am and pm for the time between
12.00 and 1.00? Or in the use of metric units?

--

Groeten, Karel Th�nissen

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Vinzent Hoefler]

sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de (Georg Bauhaus) wrote:

>As an illustration, over here in Germany a few million kids in
>the north will have to learn "old orthography" rules due to the
>efforts of a small group of propagandists (term justified(*)) to
>not adopt the new rules, adopted recently by everyone else.

Sorry for the OT. But I can't let stand this.

>The new rules were a result of a years
>lasting standardisation effort including representatives from
>Austria, Switzerland, and Germany.

Standards created by a bunch of morons can only lead to crap. At least
the changes must be considered as very inconsequential.

>It is a compromise.

It's bullshit. Simple as that.

F'up2poster


Vinzent.

-- 
Within a computer, natural language is unnatural.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Robert Dewar]

In article <38E8E738.45EE0CD5@hello.nl>,
  Karel Thoenissen <thoenissen@hello.nl> wrote:
Have they
> already reached a standard on the use of am and pm for the
time between
> 12.00 and 1.00? Or in the use of metric units?

Perhaps they don't teach Latin any more in the Netherlands :-)

There has never been any doubt that times after 12 noon are
pm (that's what the phrase means in Latin!)

Interesting to mention metrics units in the one area (times
and dates) where metric proposals have never succeeded in
any country :-)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Karel Thoenissen]

Robert Dewar schreef:

[...]

>
> Interesting to mention metrics units in the one area (times
> and dates) where metric proposals have never succeeded in
> any country :-)

Touch�      (-8


--

Groeten, Karel Th�nissen

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[pascal.martin]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --]

I disagree: hard sciences are mostly using the milli-second, micro-second,
nano-second and pico-seconds units. Not counting astronomy that uses both
10**-(any big number here) seconds and 10**(any big number here) years
values, with no unit to avail.

As such, the narrow edge that is represented by the interval 1 year .. 1 second
is too meaningless to consider seriously.  8-)  Just a bizarre catastrophe.

In article <38ECEF2E.1696FF75@hello.nl>, Karel Thoenissen <thoenissen@hello.nl> wrote:
> Robert Dewar schreef:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>
>> Interesting to mention metrics units in the one area (times
>> and dates) where metric proposals have never succeeded in
>> any country :-)
> 
> Touch�      (-8

----------------------------------------------------------
Pascal F. Martin, meaningless being.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Robert Dewar]

In article <4kgH4.7956$JE2.82630@typhoon.we.rr.com>,
  pascal.martin@iname.com.nospam wrote:

> As such, the narrow edge that is represented by the interval 1
> year .. 1 second
> is too meaningless to consider seriously.

Hmm! I find this narrow interval quite significant :-)
I hope you are not routinely one year late for appointments :-)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Wes Groleau]

> > Computer people always like to try to change common
> > usage in this way, but it won't work. The full
> > form
> >
> > April 3, 2000
> >
> > is still perfectly clear, and is actually the most
> > common usage in many countries. I do not think you
> > are about to change that :-)
> 
> Name, say, three countries not being anglosaxon that use this format.

Genealogists (including those in the U.S.) and military
(including those in the U.S.) prefer 3 April 2000, as do
folks in any non-English country I've dealt with--even Mexico.

Given this fact, I find it incredible that Lotus Notes has rather
spectacular and confusing failures when the _O.S._ is told to put
dates in European format.

> > The US 4/3/2000 is simply to be understood as short
> > hand for this longer form.
> 
> It is ambiguous in almost every continental European country I know.

Furthermore, when hand-written, it is easy for a hasty reader to confuse
'/' and '1'

Re: :-) A Brand-New Language! :-)

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 812 bytes --]


Wes Groleau a �crit dans le message
<390476E6.904B0D3D@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>...
>Given this fact, I find it incredible that Lotus Notes has rather
>spectacular and confusing failures when the _O.S._ is told to put
>dates in European format.

I know that this is not CLA related, but Lotus Notes has not only this
problem :)

This is the one of the most counter intuitive tool around I would say ! But
it seems
that it is spreading out really quickly...

Pascal.

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"