From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 4 Dec 92 18:58:28 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!li nus!linus.mitre.org!news!emery@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (David Emery) Subject: Re: Open Systems closed to Ada? Message-ID: List-Id: I promised myself I wasn't going to post any more on this topic. But I can't let this assertion by mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) go unanswered. >Maybe this is your problem. All the people you know are in the Ada >Community, so when your attitude toward people who aren't becomes >evident, you wind up seeing what you expect to see? I have spent the last 5 years working on IEEE Standard P1003.5 Ada Binding to POSIX. During this time, I have attended more POSIX meetings (3 or 4 annually) than Ada conferences. It's my observation that the great majority of people attending POSIX meetings are C people. I certainly don't think they would call themselves Ada people. When I got started in the P1003.5 effort, I was hoping that we would be welcomed by the rest of POSIX. What I expected was disinterest. What I found was hostility. So, I explicitly reject this statement by Fred McCall. My comments on the two communities are are explictly based with my experience working in the POSIX community, which I believe to be dominated by C people. And, Fred, please try to spell my last name right the next time you flame me. It's E-M-E-R-Y. You wouldn't want people to be confused about who you are attacking, would you? dave