Re: [abc] nice paper! :)

I've sent him a copy.

Ganesh

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Chris Allan wrote:

>
> I can probably be of help with proofreading the paper - I spent a few of
> my teenage years proofreading academic papers/books for various people,
> so if nothing else can pick out spelling mistakes etc.
>
> It looks like I may have to spend most of tomorrow on a school
> visit/Access event, but if someone could email me a recent copy of the
> paper asap I'd be more than happy to cast a "fairly technical but not
> too involved" eye over it.
>
> Chris
>
> Oege de Moor wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Prof. Laurie HENDREN wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I have read through the paper and made only very minor changes.
> >>I am very impressed with the paper. It is very professionaly done,
> >>with lots of related work (thanks Oege for all your research there!...
> >>I think it helps it be an AOSD paper rather than just a compiler paper)
> >
> >
> > Erm. There are errors in that, like the fact that I missed the
> > public distribution of josh. Thanks to Ondrej for noting that,
> > and a little hint to everyone else to pick a random reference
> > and check that what I said is actually true!
> >
> >
> >>I don't see any major changes left to be made. Someone needs to
> >>design our "abc technical report latex format" so we can make
> >>the technical report version as soon as we submit the paper and
> >>then put it on the aspectbench.org web site and send copies to
> >>our friends. I would love to do it, but I seem to have a queue
> >>of "other papers" I am supposed to be working on.
> >
> >
> > right, that would be nice.
> >
> >
> >>I guess we also need an official "last reader" who goes over
> >>it for a last time looking for typos. I am afraid I'm not so good
> >>at that any more .... I seem to have gained speed at the expense
> >>of accuracy ....
> >
> >
> > Damien is doing a pass tonight.
> >
> > Personally I think it is worthwhile to spend tomorrow on making
> > a few more improvements:
> > a) check references (as suggested above, but also just the
> > details of publication venue etc)
> > b) look for further typos, obscurities etc.
> > c) run the whole thing through a spell checker
> >
> > A good technique (and I'm not joking here) is to read the
> > paper backwards at this stage. If you read it forwards, it
> > all goes "yeah, seen that before, obvious..." and you read what
> > you think, not what's written.
> >
> >
> >>Anyway, a job well done. I hope the "young guys" found this an
> >>interesting experience. Now we have to shift our focus to our
> >>release (I go to CASCON next Wednesday, and would love announce
> >>the real release then...) and we also have to work on writing the
> >>CC paper and doing the analysis stuff for the PLDI paper.
> >
> >
> > I'm sorry, but I'm firmly of the opinion we're not ready for
> > a release. Quite understandably, after the IBM visit we have
> > slowed down a lot. Before we release, we should
> >
> > a) compile abc itself (so it is really possible to use aspects
> > for extension if people want to do that - it's not just
> > a fun meta-circular thing).
> >
> > b) compile atrack, or at least fix all the problems that
> > Ondrej has found
> >
> > c) pepper the source with javadoc. It is very sparse at
> > the moment, and I do not believe the source is of
> > use outside our team in its present form.
> >
> > While I'm really happy with how far we've got, it is a fact
> > that, even for a simple program like my ants viewer, there
> > were several things that needed fixing in abc before it could
> > be compiled. No pathological corner cases: a real program.
> > We have to have more confidence that abc won't break on
> > the first sizable example people try.
> >
> > Now of course we *could* race to bring out a release by CASCON,
> > and if we're lucky we'll get real users and umpteen bug reports
> > to fix that same week. Now we have to ask ourselves whether
> > that is the best use of a team that is going to drop in manpower
> > a lot as of next week, when term starts and several of the
> > Oxford gang have to go back (at least part-time :-))
> > to being undergrads.
> >
> > I think it is far more productive to get on quietly with
> > a-c) above, the CC paper, and most importantly with re-weaving.
> > That was the crucial idea that started all this in January;
> > it got lost in the development fever but fortunately Ondrej
> > insisted on getting back to it. We have to get it ready for
> > PLDI. The realisation of re-weaving will underlie lots of our
> > future plans, and it will be a big boost to our chances of
> > continuing the project if we have demonstrated it works. I
> > don't think a release would have the same impact.
> >
> > Sorry for a long email. Obviously it's important we make the
> > right strategic step now, with the very limited resources we've
> > got.
> >
> > -Oege
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Received on Wed Sep 29 00:43:33 2004