

Great Works in Programming Languages - mirceasoaica
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/courses/670Fall04/GreatWorksInPL.shtml

======
smhenderson
A very impressive list. I wondered how accessable these articles are and
searched for the first one. My first hit was a retrospective written by C.A.R.
Hoare in 2009. It too is a very interesting read. Haven't found the original
though...

[http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1562764.1562779](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1562764.1562779)

~~~
albinofrenchy
[http://www.spatial.maine.edu/~worboys/processes/hoare%20axio...](http://www.spatial.maine.edu/~worboys/processes/hoare%20axiomatic.pdf)

The title + filetype:pdf seems to find them all.

~~~
smhenderson
Awesome, thanks! I hadn't looked too hard but now that you point out how easy
it is you just gave me something to do this weekend.

------
jlukecarlson
Benjamin Pierce was my CS advisor freshman year, it's great to see him on the
front page of HN. I'm definitely going to try to get through the papers in the
"greatest of the great" section

------
igravious
Not a single woman, unless I am mistaken. (Am I?) Not sure what that says.

~~~
kedean
I don't think it says anything. The vast majority of the seminal papers were
written in the 60's and 70's, when few women were even in academia in the
first place. A good number are from the 80's, during which you can argue very
little emphasis was placed on women in engineering at all. By the nineties we
were trying harder to equalize the gap, but it was not yet a priority in the
field of CS. The last papers on here are from 2000. Basically, if you know the
history of women in academia, the lack of women on this list is absolutely no
surprise.

What do you expect people to do, pretend that there was a surplus of female
researchers when the really widely applicable research was happening? That's
simply not true, and it wouldn't be true in any field.

~~~
Kalium
Perhaps include an apology and treatise on historical sexism? Maybe go hunting
for a handful of papers by women from that era, and include them in the
interests of inclusion?

The former would be irrelevant at best, and the latter is usually called
tokenism, but both are options. If that's actually the goal. Personally, I
suspect neither is helpful.

