Richard Maine writes:
> Phillip Helbig writes:
> > Right. The term "obsolete" is, since F90, now standardese, I suppose.
>
> Strictly speaking, the standard uses the term "obsolescent".
> To tell the truth, I'm not quite sure why (it was introduced before
> my involvement with J3). To me, "obsolescent" just sounds like a
> synonym for "obsolete" with some extra syllables added to sound
> more sophisticated. I'd have just said "obsolete". Perhaps there
> is a distinction that I'm not appreciating. Or then, perhaps it
> was all a matter of how it sounded to some people. Perhaps
> "obsolescent" didn't sound as strong as "obsolete" or something.
> That's all pure speculation on my part.
I suspect that "obsolescent" wasn't invented by J3, but I'm not sure!
To my ears, "obsolete" sounds more objective. For example, punched
cards are obsolete, since modern computers don't even have the
possibility to read them. On the other hand, "obsolescent" has a ring
of "we think this should be obsolete", i.e. it's more of a judgement
call. For example, a character-cell terminal might be called
obsolescent in these days of DECwindows, X-terminals and whatever, but
this is more because some folks prefer newer stuff, i.e. the older stuff
still works.
This is just my own impression; I don't know what the official
definitions imply. IF my impression is correct, then "obsolescent" is
probably the better term, since these things are more judgement calls,
i.e. there is no objective reason why the stuff couldn't continue to
work.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|