Talk:Occam (programming language): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 11:24, 4 October 2007

Revision as of 11:31, 4 October 2007

Line 116:

:: For those unfamiliar with occam 3, a draft Reference Manual can be found [http://www.wotug.org/occam/documentation/oc3refman.pdf here] (this was cited in the occam 3 section of this article). [[User:Letdorf|Letdorf]] 10:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC).

::OK. After a quick look (I reallycan dotell notyou havethat timethis foris a reviewmodified version of itthe rightbook now)I wrote. ThisI isdo anot modifiedhave versiontime offor thean bookindepth Ireview wroteof it right now. The floating point appendix looks the same as the one written for that book by David Shepherd. And it has Geoff Barret's name on it! I scanned this book before (years ago) and I noted this then but figured no one would ever care TBH. So I don't know what to tell you. I certainly cannot support adding something about it without some substantive clarification preferably from David May or Roger Shepherd since they can speak with some authority on the matter.

::However, without this clarification, if you have a reference to a journal published scientific paper that has referenced this specification and has used the unique features of this language (whatever they are) to specify an algorithm in that paper, then I say yes, put it in. The paper can be one written and published by Geoff, for example. Otherwise, I vote no.