Language design by by committee ( was Re: Try J# ( was Re: J# is there ))

[Israel Raj T <israelrt@optushome.com.au>]

On Sun, 14 Oct 2001 04:39:14 GMT, Dale Stanbrough
<dale@cs.rmit.edu.au> wrote:
>Now repeat after me...
>   Ada was not designed by a committee.
>   Ada was not designed by a committee.
>   Ada was not designed by a committee.

Yes, you are absolutely right Dale....

At least 21 people and TWO committees were involved.

"In 1975 the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) established a   A High
Order Language Working Group (HOLWG) ...to formulate the DoD
requirements for high order languages . The requirements were widely
distributed for comment throughout the military and civil communities,
producing successively more refined versions from Strawman through
Woodenman, Tinman, Ironman, and finally Steelman."
http://www.adahome.com/History/Steelman/steeltab.htm

"A high-order language working group (HOLWG) was formed with Whitaker
as chairman. Other representatives included Cmdr. Jack Cooper, the
Navy representative (along with Bernie Zempolich and Robert Kahane),
Bill Carlson of ARPA, Maj. Tom Jarrell of the Air Force, Paul Cohen of
the Defense Communications Agency (DCA), Lt. Col. Schamber of the
Marine Corps, and Maj. Breault of the Army."
http://www.adapower.com/adafaq.htm
   
"The Ada design team was led by Jean D. Ichbiah and has included
Berned Krieg-Bruechner,  Brain A. Wichmann, Henry F. Ledgard,
Jean-Cluade Heliard, Jean-Loup Gailly, Jean-Ryanmond  Abrial, John G.
P. Barnes, Mike Woodger, Olivier Roubine, Paul N. Hilfinger, and
Robert Firth. "
http://archive.adaic.com/pol-hist/history/histada.txt
     
As for the use of the word "committee":

"Dear Lord Lytton 
For some years now, the United States Department of Defense has been
engaged in a project to define a new computer programming language for
use in weapon systems, as opposed to scientific or business and
commercial applications.
This effort will shortly reach its climax with the publication of the
language design in April 1979.  Until now, the language has not had a
distinctive name, and the steering committee of the project has been
open to suggestions for such a name.  The only serious contender, and
one the committee would like to adopt, is Ada - in honour of Countess
Lovelace. "
http://archive.adaic.com/pol-hist/history/holwg-93/3.htm

As for protests that Steelman was not a design document but was merely
a requirements document, here is a brief extract from Steelman:

"7C. Scope Rules. A reference to an identifier that is not declared in
the most local scope shall refer to a program element that is
lexically global, rather than to one that is global through the
dynamic calling structure.

Functions
7D. Function Declarations. The type of the result for each function
must be specified in its declaration and shall be determinable during
translation. The results of functions may be of any type. If a result
is of a nonindirect array or record type then the number of its
components must be determinable by
the time of function call.

Parameters
7F. Formal Parameter Classes. There shall be three classes of formal
data parameters: (a) input parameters, which act as constants that are
initialized to the value of corresponding actual parameters at the
time of call, (b) input-output parameters, which enable access and
assignment to thecorresponding actual parameters, either throughout
execution or only upon call and prior to any exit, and (c) output
parameters, whose values are transferred to the corresponding actual
parameter only at the time of normal exit. In the latter two cases the
corresponding actual parameter shall be determined at time of call and
must be a variable or an assignable component of a composite type."

http://www.adahome.com/History/Steelman/steelman.htm