Path: utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!bwdls61!bwdls58!pdbain
From: pdbain@bwdls58.bnr.ca (Peter Bain)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Jovial vs. CMS II
Message-ID: <5555@bwdls58.UUCP>
Date: 8 Feb 91 20:06:06 GMT
References: <193900.598@timbuk.cray.com> <4313@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>
Sender: pdbain@bwdls58.UUCP
Reply-To: pdbain@bwdls58.bnr.ca (Peter Bain)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 11

In article <4313@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes:
>>  - Why did(/do) the Feds love it so much?
>      Because having a language standard is so much better than having no
>      standard, even if the language could be improved on.  JOVIAL was
>      never widely used or loved outside the Air Force and their
>      contractors, but within the Air Force, it was the standard language
>      until Ada came along.

Didn't/doesn't the USAF have another standard language by the name of
CMS II?
      -peter