Xref: utzoo comp.arch:4587 comp.lang.misc:1530
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!agate!eris!mwm
From: mwm@eris (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Universal OS (was Re: Survey of
Message-ID: <9545@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 3 May 88 15:23:39 GMT
References: <2845@mmintl.UUCP> <1543@hubcap.UUCP> <768@l.cc.purdue.edu>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mwm@eris.UUCP (Mike (My watch has windows) Meyer)
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 45

In article <768@l.cc.purdue.edu> cik@l.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
<We cannot do even a fair job if the job is done by those who have designed the
<present stuff.  We need people with imagination, who are aware _that we are
<essentially ignorant_, and who are willing and eager to ask for what is wanted.

So, instead of just telling us that we're wrong, and that we should be
doing X, or Y and Z, how about _doing_ something about it?

<And they must realize that the resulting system will probably be inadequate,
<and therefore must be easily extensible.  This means that the user must be
<able to use notation which he considers easy to read, as long as that notation
<is not already coopted, and in some cases it might be necessary to change
<existing notation.  This is done in mathematics all the time, and does not
<lead to problems.

You've almost, but not quite, gotten to the nub of the problem. "What
the user considers easy to read." That varies from user to user. Some
people think LISP or FORTH are easy to read - others think that both
or Write-Only-Languages. Neither has been nearly as successful as C or
FORTRAN.  LISP even allows you to change the reader & printer to match
your favorite input syntax. None of the atlnerative systems (CGOL,
etc.) have been very popular in the LISP community.

When you complained about editors having a wildly different meanings
for different keys, you almost had it again. Editor wars are usually
considered religious wars, for good reason: what one person thinks is
an absolutely essential, must-have feature, another will think makes
the editor completely unusable (example - the "i" command from vi).
How do you build a standard in an environment where there isn't a
consensus on something as basic as what you do to indicate that you're
inputting new text?

So, do you have any suggestions as to what might be done to get around
this problem, instead of just maintaining that it _is_ a problem (I
don't think so - any more than having both a hammer and a screwdriver
is a problem)? Oh yeah - you might also let us know how many of the
languages outside the FORTRAN/ALGOL group (FP, CSP, Prolog, APL, etc.)
you've looked at.

	<mike

--
Don't tell me how to live my life			Mike Meyer
Don't tell me what to do				mwm@berkeley.edu
Repression is always brought about			ucbvax!mwm
by people with politics and attitudes like you.		mwm@ucbjade.BITNET