Bhaskar makes an important point but note that the Life Cycle processes
denote the ways to document standards conformity to "requirements" and
carry these forward during the acquisition steps well described in Life
Cycle standards. Health Acquirers MUST learn the these principles or risk
being
effort. As such, much of the deliberation has a paper trail and
history. The possibilities are numerous and exciting.
Best wishes; Chris Richardson
- Original Message -
From: "Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thu
-- Original Message ---
From: Wolfgang Giere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:34:15 +0100
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it
>
> BTW do you know of any study of the reasons why huge systems failed?
&
I will just add to Bashkar's observation that part of the LIfe Cycele
Principles is a process called "maintenance" that can be used to deal with
this issue. Consult: http://www.swebok.org . That framework possesses the
ability to deal with this challenge if folks really want to address it and
n
ink I can
see that things
are rather chaotic now, and there is not alot of clarity in "the vision".
Or, if there is,
it hasn't been articulated very well.
But, as Rick says "we'll see".
-Original Message-
From: Richard G. DAVIS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sen
Jim, this is a wonderful analogy. And I agree with the consequences for program
life. I am told there are still IBM 1401 (Autocoder) programs used in emulation
...
BTW do you know of any study of the reasons why huge systems failed? I am
trying to understand why German megaprojects failed.
Wol
Remember...a language isn't slow, but an implementation may be. MUMPS
is in many ways easier to optimize than OO languages (or even
Algol-like languages) but it is not a priori the case that Python (say)
has to be slow.
--- Wolfgang Giere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The very same argument was us
An interesting metaphor! It is my opinion that software can have a high
shelf life if it is properly cared for, but even then, I would expect
to see the entire code base "turn over" in time, though some parts of
the code would certainly be more stable than others. So, in a way, the
basic question i
The very same argument was used against Mumps --- before GT.M (and others). But
one could run 12 Terminals from one 486 PC using DataTree...
Wolfgang Giere
"Nancy E. Anthracite" wrote:
> I had a discussion recently with a copmuter professional about the merits of
> various languages. Python was
This seems to be a very good idea.
Perhaps some of you remember the (succesful) attempt of Dr. Wakai to
integrate Mumps and Prolog when Japan tried to make Prolog the core of the
fifth generation computer. One could use non procedural programming within a
procedural environment (or the other way a
I am motivated to repost below something I wrote a couple of years ago.
My apologies for any repetition, but I think it is relevant.
I would like to question Greg's basic assumption that code has limited
"shelf life". Code that is deemed obsolete will indeed have limited
shelf life, but code doe
will fail, it just adds complexity.
-Original Message-
From: Greg Woodhouse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 10:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it
My take is that the basic assumption is that code has limi
uot;.
> Or, if there is,
> it hasn't been articulated very well.
>
> But, as Rick says "we'll see".
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Richard G. DAVIS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 11:33 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTEC
vember 27, 2004 11:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it
Neither Python nor Java have the speed / throughput / scalability of M.
This won't matter to a practice (PCs are pretty fast these days), but is
likely to matter to institutions of any size.
-- Bhask
-Original Message-
From: Richard G. DAVIS [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 11:33 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it
Rick's "letter" to Kevin fails on only one small point... ...it is not
pres
Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
/snip/
> we are indeed a well mannered group. :-)
Like pigs to the slaughter.
Best regards,
Bill
---
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from rea
...thanks Bhaskar, the answer was so obvious that it proves those that
are shy out there that you can ask a really dumb question on this list
and receive a very polite and informative reply... we are indeed a well
mannered group. :-)
Joseph
K.S. Bhaskar wrote:
Front end performance typicall
Front end performance typically doesn't matter so much, because front
end computing resources are typically dedicated to each user.
-- Bhaskar
On Sun, 2004-11-28 at 02:04, Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
> What I was thinking was the front end of the application . would it
> slow things down in that
What I was thinking was the front end of the application . would it
slow things down in that case too?
K.S. Bhaskar wrote:
Neither Python nor Java have the speed / throughput / scalability of M.
This won't matter to a practice (PCs are pretty fast these days), but is
likely to matter to inst
o: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 16:29:04 -0800
> To: Hardhats <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it
>
> Dear Kevin,
>
> We are not in a catch-22.
>
> The Object-Oriented Language subcommittee (SC16) of the
Neither Python nor Java have the speed / throughput / scalability of M.
This won't matter to a practice (PCs are pretty fast these days), but is
likely to matter to institutions of any size.
-- Bhaskar
On Sat, 2004-11-27 at 21:47, Nancy E. Anthracite wrote:
> I had a discussion recently with a c
I had a discussion recently with a copmuter professional about the merits of
various languages. Python was mentioned as one that has serious speed
problems when used on a large scale.
On Saturday 27 November 2004 08:15 pm, Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
> Python is a superb choice to enhance and coe
Python is a superb choice to enhance and coexist with VistA and M... to
add to Tom's points one of its greatest strengths that programmers find
they are vastly more productive in Python than Javathere are several
comparisons of Python vs. Java on the net.
Joseph
Kevin Toppenberg wrote:
This
Btw, PHP also has similarities to M.
-- Bhaskar
On Fri, 2004-11-26 at 21:45, Tom Munnecke wrote:
> Has anyone looked at Python? It looks like a nearest neighbor to
> MUMPS, with lots of similarities. I has an interesting dictionary
> capability, handles strings well, and a very strong object mo
This is the approach I would like to see go forward.
Build on the work of others rather than reinvent the
wheel.
Kevin
--- Tom Munnecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Has anyone looked at Python? It looks like a
> nearest neighbor to
> MUMPS, with lots of similarities. I has an
> interesting di
Thanks Rick,
I agree that a language change would require a
complete rewrite of VistA, and that is not going to
happen.
I also agree re the hype issue with different
languages. And yes, VistA has done quite well without
all the extra bells and whistles of other languages.
I think we all underst
Has anyone looked at Python? It looks like a nearest neighbor to
MUMPS, with lots of similarities. I has an interesting dictionary
capability, handles strings well, and a very strong object model.
What about embedding M in Python?
On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:41:10 -0800 (PST), Jim Self <[EMAIL PROT
Terry L. Wiechmann wrote:
>If the community is going to revive the standardization process, it better
>have a 'vision' beyond the Millennium Standard.
I am excited to think that things may be moving in that direction, but I think
that
revival of a MUMPS standardization process may be premature. I
It may also be useful to look at how the Python and Perl communities
are approaching language change. But, in any event, standardization of
a language that has evolved through an open source process (if that's
what MUMPS becomes) could be a bit of a thorny problem. There are open
source compilers f
Terry L. Wiechmann wrote:
>A while back Kevin T. made a comment stating that MUMPS was a database
>scripting language. Thirty years ago when one tier (physical) systems were
>the rage, MUMPS played the role and played it well. Today, one and even two
>tier systems are an anachronism.
I have heard
The IETF requires something like this. Actually, there is no
requirement that multiple implementations be provided by different
vendors, but for an RFC to reach the status of standard, there must be
multiple interoperable implementations from different code bases. Tying
the procdess to commerical v
Dear Kevin,
We are not in a catch-22.
The Object-Oriented Language subcommittee (SC16) of the MDC spent many
years examining the state of the art in OO languages and databases to
determine how MUMPS should be upgraded with OO features. We know how to
do this, now, and we know why we cannot simpl
Three thoughts on the MDC revival, and I think it an excellent idea, one
that MUST be pursued, and must occur, if the M language might survive. And
I think it should. But,if you wouldn't mind a comment offered with the
humility of someone who knows he has been much less involved than you all.
1.
ere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM
> Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:
> [Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
>
> > This is won
While I like the idea of standards, and have been involved in standards
activities in other places and times (although not personally in the
MDC, I did pay for representation from GT.M), it would seem to me that
useful standards require multiple implementations from competing
vendors.
For vendors
em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM
Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:
[Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye
Mumps
This is wonderful. But I w
IL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 25, 2004 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:
[Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
> I know nothing of the processes etc. of the MDC... but it sounds like
> some of the
r 25, 2004 8:28 AM
Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:
[Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it
isn't clear that
there will be people and support for a
Yes completely agree regarding publicity etc.what I had in mind was
connecting the community nerve ending back together firstpublicity
must wait for the foundation to be in place.
Joseph
Prof. em. Dr. med. Wolfgang Giere wrote:
This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicit
ay, November 25, 2004 8:28 AM
Subject: [Hardhats-members] Re: MDC/MUG Revival - Just do it (was) Re:
[Hardhats-members] Nov17thinterview [added] Dr. K, MUG, MDC, Goodbye Mumps
> This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it
isn't clear that
> there will be peo
This is wonderful. But I would suggest not to raise publicity before it isn't
clear that
there will be people and support for a new MDC and which route to take. Better
be
coutious now than frustrated later!
I have been member of the MDC and head of the German ISO delegation for years
and could
41 matches
Mail list logo
