(Long) Re: Autocoding project proposal.

[David Masterson]

>>>>> Timothy Rue writes:

> On 06-Feb-02 12:12:24 David Masterson <dmaster at synopsys.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Timothy Rue writes:

>>> There is only the creation of a configuration of very common code
>>> functionality, carried out to it's natural conclusion in support
>>> of versatility.

>> That has already been done.  It's been done over and over for the
>> last 50 years of computer programming.  Without a clear definition
>> of what you mean by "common code functionality" to differentiate
>> your approach versus what's already out there, I see nothing
>> worthwhile in your project.

> I've defined the nine commands, so show me where this configuration
> you claim has been done over and over again.

I didn't say they did it in "nine commands".  I said that everyone has
been working on a definition of "common code" since the very beginning
of computer programming (for proof, read some of the history of many
computer programming languages).  The problem is that everyone has a
different definition of *exactly* what works best.  Oh, there are many
generally accepted principles but everyone "colors" the definition of
those principles within their particular implementation (its only
natural for that to occur).  You might be the first to make the claim
that those principles can be represented in "nine commands".

However, so far, your definition of the "nine commands" isn't clear
enough to determine whether your claim is valid.

-- 
David Masterson                dmaster AT synopsys DOT com
Sr. R&D Engineer               Synopsys, Inc.
Software Engineering           Sunnyvale, CA