Re: Host association in interface
From: Dan Nagle (dnagle_at_erols.com)
Date: 11/26/03
- Next message: Stig Kildegĺrd Andersen: "Re: National Labs, Fortran, and free compilers"
- Previous message: Jugoslav Dujic: "Re: subroutines as separate files"
- In reply to: James Giles: "Re: Host association in interface"
- Next in thread: Jan C. Vorbrüggen: "Re: Host association in interface"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 06:48:38 -0500
Hello,
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:49:24 GMT, "James Giles"
<jamesgiles@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
<snip>
>
>Also, the committee is doing language design, rather than standardizing
>common practice. That means that no one, not even the promoter of the
>feature, actually has any hands-on experience using it. And certainly,
>no one has any idea how the general users of the language will deal
>with it.
OTOH, if there's enough demand or the feature solves a problem
needing solution, vendors have been known to implement the feature
before the language reaches CD. (Of course, then the vendor is
reluctant to remove the feature if J3 does, BTAM.)
Al least some revision based on feedback is possible.
<snip>
-- Cheers! Dan Nagle Purple Sage Computing Solutions, Inc.
- Next message: Stig Kildegĺrd Andersen: "Re: National Labs, Fortran, and free compilers"
- Previous message: Jugoslav Dujic: "Re: subroutines as separate files"
- In reply to: James Giles: "Re: Host association in interface"
- Next in thread: Jan C. Vorbrüggen: "Re: Host association in interface"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|