Talk:Occam (programming language): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 01:52, 29 October 2007

Revision as of 02:03, 29 October 2007

Line 127:

:I am inclined to think that there should be a reference to the existence of that variation; I don't think that it has to be either a red link or a huge thing, just enough so that someone who comes here looking for information about Occam 3 can find that it is (was?) real and they should look further (and elsewhere) if that's what they need. Completely not mentioning it may lead people to think that their reference was a typo for Occam 2. [[User:OtterSmith|htom]] 13:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

:: No one has yet offered evidence that it eitherThere is orno (was)reason realat inall anyto meaningfulsuppose sense.Itthat issomeone notwould relevant,go oranywhere necessary (in the context of the current article)looking for Wikipedia,information toabout mentionOccam every3 scapeas offar paperas onI thecan floor of historytell. ThisNo articleone ishas sparseyet andoffered isevidence prettythat muchit completely devoid of useful information about the language. In my view iteither is disproportionateor to(was) mentionreal itin evenany onmeaningful the Talk pagesense. --[[User:Stevenzenith|Steven Zenith]] 01:52, 29 October 2007 (UTC)