OHOHOHOH!
I got this one!
Call it paramyxovirus
or...
maybe...
live attenuated mumps that way people know it isn't as virulent!!!
Or... maybe I will just be quiet again
BTW... Kevin... can you call external routines or system functions in
mumps?
If so... well..
how about M# or MOOL?:-)
On 8/23/05, Ruben Safir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 12:15, Greg Woodhouse wrote:
> > ANYTHING but M++!
> >
>
> Call it longhorn
>
> Ruben
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> SF.Net email is Sponsored by
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 12:15, Greg Woodhouse wrote:
> ANYTHING but M++!
>
Call it longhorn
Ruben
---
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practi
You had it right the first time. This second way has a double negative!
But I knew what you ment :-)
On 8/23/05, James Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I made a typo. I left out the word "not".!!! I meant to write:
> That said, I think it
> needs to not be changed in ways that will not brea
ANYTHING but M++!
Actually, I had in mind tagging the object code as old (or version 1,
which sounds much better).
--- Kevin Toppenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not opposed to moving the language forward.
> I think it could be done in a way that would identify the new code as
> new, and
I'm not opposed to moving the language forward.
I think it could be done in a way that would identify the new code as
new, and use different syntax.
Such as put "SYNTAX NEW" or something at the beginning of the source code.
And we can call the language M++ :-)
Kevin
On 8/23/05, Greg Woodhouse
