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?