Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs

Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net>
Thu, 03 Jul 2014 21:44:46 -0700

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
[8 earlier articles]
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2014-06-29)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-06-29)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs genew@telus.net (Gene Wirchenko) (2014-06-30)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs ivan@ootbcomp.com (Ivan Godard) (2014-06-30)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2014-07-02)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs monnier@iro.umontreal.ca (Stefan Monnier) (2014-07-03)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs genew@telus.net (Gene Wirchenko) (2014-07-03)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2014-07-04)
Re: specifying semantics, was Formatting of Language LRMs DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2014-07-04)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2014 21:44:46 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
References: 14-06-010 14-06-023 14-06-025 14-06-027 14-06-030 14-06-031 14-06-035 14-07-001
Keywords: history
Posted-Date: 04 Jul 2014 00:58:36 EDT

On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 20:53:21 -0700, Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com>
wrote:


>On 6/30/2014 6:09 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jun 2014 11:49:00 -0700, Ivan Godard <ivan@ootbcomp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> BTW, I'm talking about the VWG in the *Revised* Report, which different
>>> somewhat from that in the original report before the Great Schism.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> What was this, please?


          Thank you.


>These events, known as the Great Schism, occurred slightly before I
>arrived. I attended a few meetings of both WG2.1 and WG2.3 and found
>the character of the two groups very different: WG2.1 had a youthful
>enthusiastic, and creative feel to it, while WG2.3 seemed to be
>sourpuss, political, and puffed-up: an air of offense that someone
>should enter the rarefied academe without proper obeisance. That was


          Interesting. I always got a similar feeling about Wirth's
languages.


          Context is everything folks. Just try searching for the Great
Schism when you do not know what it is. There has been more than one.


[snip]


Sincerely,


Gene Wirchekno


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.