Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!hubcap!fpst
From: fpst@hubcap.UUCP (Steve Stevenson)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Universal OS & universal language
Message-ID: <1575@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: 5 May 88 14:54:13 GMT
References: <1596@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Lines: 32

The comments on this subject are somewhat misleading.  One must
keep clearly in mind that what most folks call "programming language"
is really virtual machine + a tad of syntax.

After twenty years in the language and computability game, about the
strongest conclusion I can come to is that language is a very personal
commodity.  Compilers developed to meet the needs of early programmers
with different needs.  The issues in the '60s was fast compilation and
optimal runtimes.

It is time to reevaluate that objective function.  I personally think
it stinks.  The question - now that some folks want to have the
fate of the world in the hands of programmers - is getting things
to work right every time.   When you, dear reader, were cheaper than
the machine, your management didn't care about how long you worked.
And since the life time of commerical software was thought to be
short, they really didn't care about quality.

Now we're paying the price for teaching you syntax and not semantics and
brand loyalty instead of principles.

As to the universal OS - it is a "language" too, at least in the formal
sense.  UNIX is neat, but certainly not the ultimate.  This newsgroup
represents the folks who start it off.  You need to consider principles
in computation and programming as much as the engineering principles.

End soapbox.
-- 
Steve Stevenson                            fpst@hubcap.clemson.edu
(aka D. E. Stevenson),                     fpst@clemson.csnet
Department of Computer Science,            comp.parallel
Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1906 (803)656-5880.mabell