It's interesting that the John Warnock interview, on Postscript, has not dated in the least.
John Page's article, has dated somewhat with its mention of candidate programming languages, but it's the one I searched out, as his discussion of the philosophy behind pfs: File is one that has always profoundly influenced me.
>But here is the real “grabber.” The programs that are more difficult to use make a selling point out of that difficulty. They turn it into a feature: The user of a complex system can specify exactly where the columns go, whereas PFS puts them where it wants. The truth of the matter is that almost anybody who uses the more complex program changes the report five times before it looks just right. Or else they put up with a rotten-looking report. I question if that’s productive.
John Page's article, has dated somewhat with its mention of candidate programming languages, but it's the one I searched out, as his discussion of the philosophy behind pfs: File is one that has always profoundly influenced me.
Link and quote: http://programmersatwork.wordpress.com/john-page-1986/
>But here is the real “grabber.” The programs that are more difficult to use make a selling point out of that difficulty. They turn it into a feature: The user of a complex system can specify exactly where the columns go, whereas PFS puts them where it wants. The truth of the matter is that almost anybody who uses the more complex program changes the report five times before it looks just right. Or else they put up with a rotten-looking report. I question if that’s productive.