exactly. this is why i suggest that we select something that is not
associated with any given vendor. my gut feeling is that the combiners
will be relatively simple and that c syntax should be sufficient.
b
On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 07:40, Ken Yagen wrote:
> The fact that it is pseudocode not executable code means that we should not
> require it be possible to throw it in a JVM and compile it. I believe the
> proposal was just to provide a standard syntax that most people are familiar
> with explain the algorithms. You don't need a syntax to write pseudocode,
> but since this is a collaborative process, it is beneficial to be
> consistent.
