| |
 | Posted by Kris |  Permalink Reply |
|
Kris 
| Check out the attachment (15K, view with winzip-internal-viewer). It's an anecdotal recall of the Algol-68 design process (by a committee). Draw whatever parallels you care to, but it's an interesting and jolly read once you get past the half way point; e.g.:
"Even though a large part of the meeting had been very constructive, it ended on a sour note. The behavior of the great scientists present showed me that the progress of science is not just a matter of objective truths but also strongly influenced by human emotions. I concluded, still naively, that only a very good language defined in a very clear report could convince the members of WG2.1."
<snip> <snip>
"The meeting started off badly. Since only 15 of the Working group members (out of 34) had been present at Tirrenia, there had been no quorum. The validity of the Resolutions taken, and therefore even the legality of the present meeting, was in doubt. After much debate they were re-voted, and accepted. I wondered whether an illegal meeting could legalize itself by re-voting history.
Now and then, all parties took time off to blame the Chairman, Willem Louis van der Poel, for procedural errors or well-meaning remarks that managed to throw oil on the troubled flames. In fact, shouting at the Chairman seemed to be the only activity in which the WG2.1 members found themselves united"
|
