Newsgroups: comp.sys.transputer
From: J.C.Highfield@lut.ac.uk
Reply-To: J.C.Highfield@lut.ac.uk (J.C.Highfield)
Subject: Re: OCCAM3 (was :- Revision of occam 2 Referenc
Organization: Loughborough University, UK.
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 1994 13:23:06 GMT
Message-ID: <Cu62II.Lq6@lut.ac.uk>

In article <31vt1s$bf6@dscomsa.desy.de> A.Kruse@nikhef.nl writes:
>In article Mwt@wizzy.com, andyr@wizzy.com (Andy Rabagliati) writes:
>> >peter@bustard.inmos.co.uk (Peter Hassall) writes:
> 
>> >> INMOS is considering a revision of the occam 2 Reference Manual in the
>> >> near future and would appreciate any comments on the current edition.
>
>> Andres Kruse (NIKHEF),1c/137,2909 <A.Kruse@nikhef.nl> wrote:
>
>> >What about a questionaire to OCCAM2 users about what they would like
>> >to have implemented in new OCCAM versions ? 
>
>> This has little relevance to documenting OCCAM2.
>

On a related note, will the new manual cover the occam 3 features that are
being incorporated into the occam 2 compilers (according to that 'policy
statement' about the future of occam at Inmos)?

Presumably the revised occam 2 reference will be the standard reference for
people working with the new compilers, so although the extensions would not
be part of occam 2 it would at least be useful to include them somewhere in
the document.

Julian



