| | Re: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
(...) What are you meaning by multiple syntax levels, Damien? (...) Let me report that LMPL is almost ready. It is going to be published soon. (...) LMPL contains these in theory. (...) Of course we should. (...) Well, this seems to be usable. In (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
|
| | Re: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
Hello Láng Attila D. and Hello Kiss Attila Csongor, This thread is not very frequented now. May be because the debate has to become much more technical. (...) I mean if LMPL is not sufficient, we are in danger to either add more and more syntax (...) (23 years ago, 25-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
|
| | Re[2]: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
Hi all, hello Damien! DG> This thread is not very frequented now. DG> May be because the debate has to become much more technical. Yes, there is not so many traffic here nowadays. We knew this will be a long project because it's a big project with (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
|
| | Re: Re[2]: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
(...) Hello Láng Attila D. Hello Kiss Attila Csongor, Now you speak about layers. That is precisely what I called "multiple syntax levels". Software layers are known to be very bad for software engineering and design in general. On the contrary, ALM (...) (23 years ago, 26-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|
|
| | Re[4]: I have read the article about LCD
|
|
Hi Damien! DG> Now you speak about layers. DG> That is precisely what I called "multiple syntax levels". DG> Software layers are known to be very bad for software engineering and design DG> in general. I don't think so. What about object oriented (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.lcd)
|