sent to info-ada-request by mistake

[cragge@AJPO.SEI.CMU.EDU]

The following message was received at info-ada-request

------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: ???
Received: by ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (5.61/2.5)
        id AA25069; Fri, 25 May 90 08:10:21 -0400
Received: from TOPS20.RADC.AF.MIL by ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (5.61/2.5)
        id AA25063; Fri, 25 May 90 08:10:13 -0400
Date: Fri 25 May 90 08:11:11-EST
From: CAROZZONI@TOPS20.RADC.AF.MIL
Subject: Ted & Ada
To: info-ada-request@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu
Message-Id: <12592493215.10.CAROZZONI@TOPS20.RADC.AF.MIL>

>Why should any language BE concerned with parallelism?
>Tasking is naturally an operating system feature;  the idea of
>tasking as a part of a language is one of the dumber ideas since
>communism.

     Gee Ted, you better extend your feelings to the C/C++ community
concerning AT&T's introduction of Concurrent C.

>There's no right way to do it, as a careful reading of the 750
>little "problems" should make obvious to anybody. 

     They did a good job with C/C++ - I bet they can do it again
with Concurrent C.

>In all truth, I can't really believe that any of the serious
>people in this group who have read through any of that would
>argue this point with me.

     I personally think AT&T is very serious - but time will
tell. If enough people "spread the word" about the dangers of
parallelism within a language, may be Concurrent C, Occam, and
other such languages can be killed off before it's too late.
 
- -- joe carozzoni
- -------

------- End of Forwarded Message