What are the IPSE’s, the ASPE’s, the FRIPSE’s and the GRIPSE’s?Could you see what you are typing in a...
Dealing with stress in coding interviews
Is a Centaur considered an animal when calculating carrying capacity for vehicles?
Unlock your Lock
Where does learning new skills fit into Agile?
Is a memoized pure function itself considered pure?
Is it unusual for a math department not to have a mail/web server?
Why error propagation in CBC mode encryption affect two blocks?
Given current technology, could TV display screens double as video camera sensors?
Notice period 60 days but I need to join in 45 days
Multiple delayed triggers from Massacre Girl interaction
How to prevent a hosting company from accessing a VM's encryption keys?
Is first Ubuntu user root?
If a product space is metrisable, are the factor spaces metrisable?
3D cryptic featuring Mao, Stalin and Simba's uncle
Disk usage of integer column vs boolean column in Postgres
Is it ok to record the 'environment' around my workplace?
Weighted smooth histogram
Half filled water bottle
Biological refrigeration?
Is the internet in Madagascar faster than in UK?
What does rm -rf $(!!) mean?
Hangman game in Python - need feedback on the quality of code
Why does a sticker slowly peel off, but if it is pulled quickly it tears?
Why does matter stays collapsed following the supernova explosion?
What are the IPSE’s, the ASPE’s, the FRIPSE’s and the GRIPSE’s?
Could you see what you are typing in a Teletype?What ended the Sony console partnerships with Sega and Nintendo?What was the purpose and history of the C64's special keys?Why are the | and ¦ keys labelled the wrong way around?What are Holorydmachines?Why did C use the -> operator instead of reusing the . operator?In the original Z80 layout, where are the “traps” located? And what are their effects?What was this menu application in DOS?What was the difference between a Games Console and a Home Computer?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
In one of Edsger Dijkstra's most famous essays "By way of introduction" there is this paragraph:
As final example of skirting the programming issue I mention “software engineering”, the IPSE’s, the ASPE’s, the FRIPSE’s and the GRIPSE’s and all further animation tools you can think of. They come from a world that has accepted its charter “How to program if you cannot.”. The best of these efforts just confuse composing with the physical act of writing the score, others are foolish at best, and some are criminal.
From the context, it seems like those are some graphical tools from the 80s (the essay is dated 12 Feb 1989), which were used for computer programming education, however I wasn't able to find any information on the Internet about them.
history identify-this-software
New contributor
add a comment |
In one of Edsger Dijkstra's most famous essays "By way of introduction" there is this paragraph:
As final example of skirting the programming issue I mention “software engineering”, the IPSE’s, the ASPE’s, the FRIPSE’s and the GRIPSE’s and all further animation tools you can think of. They come from a world that has accepted its charter “How to program if you cannot.”. The best of these efforts just confuse composing with the physical act of writing the score, others are foolish at best, and some are criminal.
From the context, it seems like those are some graphical tools from the 80s (the essay is dated 12 Feb 1989), which were used for computer programming education, however I wasn't able to find any information on the Internet about them.
history identify-this-software
New contributor
add a comment |
In one of Edsger Dijkstra's most famous essays "By way of introduction" there is this paragraph:
As final example of skirting the programming issue I mention “software engineering”, the IPSE’s, the ASPE’s, the FRIPSE’s and the GRIPSE’s and all further animation tools you can think of. They come from a world that has accepted its charter “How to program if you cannot.”. The best of these efforts just confuse composing with the physical act of writing the score, others are foolish at best, and some are criminal.
From the context, it seems like those are some graphical tools from the 80s (the essay is dated 12 Feb 1989), which were used for computer programming education, however I wasn't able to find any information on the Internet about them.
history identify-this-software
New contributor
In one of Edsger Dijkstra's most famous essays "By way of introduction" there is this paragraph:
As final example of skirting the programming issue I mention “software engineering”, the IPSE’s, the ASPE’s, the FRIPSE’s and the GRIPSE’s and all further animation tools you can think of. They come from a world that has accepted its charter “How to program if you cannot.”. The best of these efforts just confuse composing with the physical act of writing the score, others are foolish at best, and some are criminal.
From the context, it seems like those are some graphical tools from the 80s (the essay is dated 12 Feb 1989), which were used for computer programming education, however I wasn't able to find any information on the Internet about them.
history identify-this-software
history identify-this-software
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 12 hours ago
Ardavast DayleryanArdavast Dayleryan
333 bronze badges
333 bronze badges
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
IPSE = Integrated Project Support Environment
(or Integrated Programming Support Environment
ASPE = Ada Programming Support Environment
FRIPSE = Formal Reasoning Integrated Programming Support Environment
GRIPSE = Graphical Integrated Programming Support Environment
Keep in mind, Dijkstra's rant is about the formal programming hype of the late 1980s which he didn't consider to be fruitful, wise man he was.
Some further links:
IPSE
The preliminary specification of FRIPSE, KD Jones, 1987
MURAL (as what is FRIPSE known today) (Also here)
A uniform graphical view of the program construction process: GRIPSE
Some examples can be found in a 1987 paper provided by alephzero
When searching, adding "Formal Verification" might be helpful, as that was the core idea. After all, programming is just mathematics, right? So it should be possible to program in a way that it's possible to prove the correctness in an automated, formalized way. Thankfully mostly dead by now.
As a side note, if there's any writing of im that can be consideres most famous, then it's his 1968 "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". This one infuenced eventually each and every modern programming language (except Brainfuck that is).
1
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
IPSE stands for "Integrated Project Support Environment"; this was one of a series of names given to projects related to using theorm proving in software engineering. Wikipedia has a brief blurb on it, but this Chilton Computing page offers more detail and probably gives a better sense of what it is and what it does. FRIPSE and GRIPSE were related (FR meaning "formal reasoning" and "GR" meaning "graphical."
If your concern is not about the details of these particular packages at those times but instead what Dijktra was talking about when he mentioned those (certainly any modern example could be substituted in that paper and still preserve what he was trying to say), the Software Engineering StackExchange would be a better place for questions.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "648"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Ardavast Dayleryan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f12154%2fwhat-are-the-ipse-s-the-aspe-s-the-fripse-s-and-the-gripse-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
IPSE = Integrated Project Support Environment
(or Integrated Programming Support Environment
ASPE = Ada Programming Support Environment
FRIPSE = Formal Reasoning Integrated Programming Support Environment
GRIPSE = Graphical Integrated Programming Support Environment
Keep in mind, Dijkstra's rant is about the formal programming hype of the late 1980s which he didn't consider to be fruitful, wise man he was.
Some further links:
IPSE
The preliminary specification of FRIPSE, KD Jones, 1987
MURAL (as what is FRIPSE known today) (Also here)
A uniform graphical view of the program construction process: GRIPSE
Some examples can be found in a 1987 paper provided by alephzero
When searching, adding "Formal Verification" might be helpful, as that was the core idea. After all, programming is just mathematics, right? So it should be possible to program in a way that it's possible to prove the correctness in an automated, formalized way. Thankfully mostly dead by now.
As a side note, if there's any writing of im that can be consideres most famous, then it's his 1968 "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". This one infuenced eventually each and every modern programming language (except Brainfuck that is).
1
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
IPSE = Integrated Project Support Environment
(or Integrated Programming Support Environment
ASPE = Ada Programming Support Environment
FRIPSE = Formal Reasoning Integrated Programming Support Environment
GRIPSE = Graphical Integrated Programming Support Environment
Keep in mind, Dijkstra's rant is about the formal programming hype of the late 1980s which he didn't consider to be fruitful, wise man he was.
Some further links:
IPSE
The preliminary specification of FRIPSE, KD Jones, 1987
MURAL (as what is FRIPSE known today) (Also here)
A uniform graphical view of the program construction process: GRIPSE
Some examples can be found in a 1987 paper provided by alephzero
When searching, adding "Formal Verification" might be helpful, as that was the core idea. After all, programming is just mathematics, right? So it should be possible to program in a way that it's possible to prove the correctness in an automated, formalized way. Thankfully mostly dead by now.
As a side note, if there's any writing of im that can be consideres most famous, then it's his 1968 "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". This one infuenced eventually each and every modern programming language (except Brainfuck that is).
1
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
IPSE = Integrated Project Support Environment
(or Integrated Programming Support Environment
ASPE = Ada Programming Support Environment
FRIPSE = Formal Reasoning Integrated Programming Support Environment
GRIPSE = Graphical Integrated Programming Support Environment
Keep in mind, Dijkstra's rant is about the formal programming hype of the late 1980s which he didn't consider to be fruitful, wise man he was.
Some further links:
IPSE
The preliminary specification of FRIPSE, KD Jones, 1987
MURAL (as what is FRIPSE known today) (Also here)
A uniform graphical view of the program construction process: GRIPSE
Some examples can be found in a 1987 paper provided by alephzero
When searching, adding "Formal Verification" might be helpful, as that was the core idea. After all, programming is just mathematics, right? So it should be possible to program in a way that it's possible to prove the correctness in an automated, formalized way. Thankfully mostly dead by now.
As a side note, if there's any writing of im that can be consideres most famous, then it's his 1968 "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". This one infuenced eventually each and every modern programming language (except Brainfuck that is).
IPSE = Integrated Project Support Environment
(or Integrated Programming Support Environment
ASPE = Ada Programming Support Environment
FRIPSE = Formal Reasoning Integrated Programming Support Environment
GRIPSE = Graphical Integrated Programming Support Environment
Keep in mind, Dijkstra's rant is about the formal programming hype of the late 1980s which he didn't consider to be fruitful, wise man he was.
Some further links:
IPSE
The preliminary specification of FRIPSE, KD Jones, 1987
MURAL (as what is FRIPSE known today) (Also here)
A uniform graphical view of the program construction process: GRIPSE
Some examples can be found in a 1987 paper provided by alephzero
When searching, adding "Formal Verification" might be helpful, as that was the core idea. After all, programming is just mathematics, right? So it should be possible to program in a way that it's possible to prove the correctness in an automated, formalized way. Thankfully mostly dead by now.
As a side note, if there's any writing of im that can be consideres most famous, then it's his 1968 "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". This one infuenced eventually each and every modern programming language (except Brainfuck that is).
edited 11 hours ago
answered 12 hours ago
RaffzahnRaffzahn
67.7k6 gold badges167 silver badges279 bronze badges
67.7k6 gold badges167 silver badges279 bronze badges
1
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
1
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
1
1
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
+1, I spent too long reading related papers! “ASPE” is a typo in Dijkstra’s note; it should be “APSE”. (See e.g. The importance of Ada programming support environments.)
– Stephen Kitt
12 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
See for example homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/cliff.jones/publications/MUCS-TRs/….
– alephzero
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@StephenKitt It was about the time I finally gave up on following any theory. I'm always keen to offload standard tasks of validation and error checking to the machine, so I really tried hard to find any good use for that approach. What a waste of time. BTW, I love Ada. Next best thing after Assembly.
– Raffzahn
11 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@Raffzahn I never got into formal programming either, but I’ve been following Clifford Wolf’s work on formal RISC-V the past few years, he’s getting some really interesting results!
– Stephen Kitt
10 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
@StephenKitt Oh, I do belive about a nice for formal proof in hardware development - as long as it can be reduced close enough. Similar there are a few nieces in very special areas of software. Just never a majority, as real world requirements are way too complex. Using formal systems for RL applications always rely on assumptions ad non conclusive reduction, rendering any result worthless. The basic problem with European CS is that programming was seen as a facet of mathematics, not engineering. And formal proof is one of the dead end developments favoured.
– Raffzahn
9 hours ago
|
show 4 more comments
IPSE stands for "Integrated Project Support Environment"; this was one of a series of names given to projects related to using theorm proving in software engineering. Wikipedia has a brief blurb on it, but this Chilton Computing page offers more detail and probably gives a better sense of what it is and what it does. FRIPSE and GRIPSE were related (FR meaning "formal reasoning" and "GR" meaning "graphical."
If your concern is not about the details of these particular packages at those times but instead what Dijktra was talking about when he mentioned those (certainly any modern example could be substituted in that paper and still preserve what he was trying to say), the Software Engineering StackExchange would be a better place for questions.
add a comment |
IPSE stands for "Integrated Project Support Environment"; this was one of a series of names given to projects related to using theorm proving in software engineering. Wikipedia has a brief blurb on it, but this Chilton Computing page offers more detail and probably gives a better sense of what it is and what it does. FRIPSE and GRIPSE were related (FR meaning "formal reasoning" and "GR" meaning "graphical."
If your concern is not about the details of these particular packages at those times but instead what Dijktra was talking about when he mentioned those (certainly any modern example could be substituted in that paper and still preserve what he was trying to say), the Software Engineering StackExchange would be a better place for questions.
add a comment |
IPSE stands for "Integrated Project Support Environment"; this was one of a series of names given to projects related to using theorm proving in software engineering. Wikipedia has a brief blurb on it, but this Chilton Computing page offers more detail and probably gives a better sense of what it is and what it does. FRIPSE and GRIPSE were related (FR meaning "formal reasoning" and "GR" meaning "graphical."
If your concern is not about the details of these particular packages at those times but instead what Dijktra was talking about when he mentioned those (certainly any modern example could be substituted in that paper and still preserve what he was trying to say), the Software Engineering StackExchange would be a better place for questions.
IPSE stands for "Integrated Project Support Environment"; this was one of a series of names given to projects related to using theorm proving in software engineering. Wikipedia has a brief blurb on it, but this Chilton Computing page offers more detail and probably gives a better sense of what it is and what it does. FRIPSE and GRIPSE were related (FR meaning "formal reasoning" and "GR" meaning "graphical."
If your concern is not about the details of these particular packages at those times but instead what Dijktra was talking about when he mentioned those (certainly any modern example could be substituted in that paper and still preserve what he was trying to say), the Software Engineering StackExchange would be a better place for questions.
answered 12 hours ago
Curt J. SampsonCurt J. Sampson
3,60210 silver badges38 bronze badges
3,60210 silver badges38 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
Ardavast Dayleryan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Ardavast Dayleryan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Ardavast Dayleryan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Ardavast Dayleryan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f12154%2fwhat-are-the-ipse-s-the-aspe-s-the-fripse-s-and-the-gripse-s%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown