Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!ucbvax!hplabs!sri-unix!quintus!ok From: ok@quintus.uucp (Richard A. O'Keefe) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: How to supplant FORTRAN (Was: Algol-68 down for the count) Message-ID: <814@quintus.UUCP> Date: 6 Dec 88 02:08:21 GMT References: <416@ubbpc.UUCP> <3741@hubcap.UUCP> Sender: news@quintus.UUCP Reply-To: ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) Organization: Quintus Computer Systems, Inc. Lines: 10 In article <3741@hubcap.UUCP> steve@ragman writes: > @ CS folks do not have a recogized derivation criteria[sic] for their > programs. Programs unfortunately just ARE qua ARE. Scientists > and engineers have recognized ways to deal with the derivation. > We should support that somehow. This sounds important, but I don't understand what you mean by "a derivation criterion". (I guess Statistics doesn't count as science or engineering, otherwise I would know what the "recognised ways" are.) Where does program transformation come into this?