From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_DATE, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!rex!JNCS@uno.edu From: jncs@uno.edu Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada9x Transition Plan (443 lines) ftp-ed from AJPO Message-ID: <0094631B.7257CA80@uno.edu> Date: 26 Mar 91 22:50:08 GMT References: <2916@sparko.gwu.edu> ,<2926@sparko.gwu.edu> Sender: news@rex.cs.tulane.edu Reply-To: jncs@uno.edu List-Id: In article <2926@sparko.gwu.edu>, mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes: >In article jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) writes: >>> 3.2 FREE EDUCATIONAL ADA 9X COMPILATION SYSTEM >>> >>> Since this system is for educational purposes only, and >>> there is no intent to compete with industry but rather to stimu- >>> late the market, it may be that certain features of the language >>> are not supported; >> >>Bad idea, bad precedent. One of the great selling points of Ada over >>any other language is that it IS a standard. Introducing dialects, >>ESPECIALLY in an educational system, is regressive. Either teach Ada >>or don't teach Ada, but by all means don't teach "sort-of" Ada. >> >I couldn't agree more with your basic idea. However, industry folks should >realize that in the university world we don't teach languages, we teach >concepts and the languages are just means to the end (this is especially I could not agree more with MF. In university environments a language is just that, a tool. We do not tailor curricula around specific languages. We do it around concepts, and methodologies which we see have strong transfer value to specific tasks undergraduates will end up doing in the "real world". Pascal was a great expirience from which we learned much (both educators and practitioners). If we are denied a subset of a language, we are denied the oportunity we could have to experiment with new concepts and methodologies, which we eventually we must face when the whole language is completely hammered out, released and compilers become available. Let's recall that we can find a subset of Ada similar to Pascal. Besides the language, and the comercially strong compilers, we NEED to develop the appropriate methodology and teaching tools for it; thus the sooner you give me a flavor of the language, the sooner I get to think of appropriate methodologies both for programming in it in particular and for developing systems in general. >I am definitely opposed to a dialect being supported in this educational >system. On the other hand, while everyone sat around and waited, we >at GW and elsewhere taught _hundreds_ of students Ada, from 1983 on, >using TeleSoft's interim system, which (you may recall) did not support >generics or task types (though it supported named tasks decently well), >and surely didn't support chapter 13. I rather do without chapter 13, than with a language that allows me to teach development of systems via the modelling and implementation of ADT's. Coming back to Pascal, this department at Univ of New Orleans taught Pascal in spring of 74 using a poorly implemented interpreter imported from Europe. I'm sure it must have felt great, in spite of the quality of the interpreter, as since then and until 1984, Pascal was taught to cs students. I must add that at that date we adopted Ada and used the Telesoft version mentioned above. >AJPO: get something out there _quickly_ and don't be afraid to let us have >premature stuff to play with. We're smart guys and we can work around the >deficiencies. And for Heaven's sake, let us in the universities have >the source code, RIGHT FROM THE START, so we can "add value." ditto. With respect to the industry perception of what we do in the classrooms, it has always been a source of much grief. They want me to teach my students COBOL and as much as I and the students can endure. CS students in my school are not required to take COBOL; also, we only teach on course of COBOL. In several occassions, students have told me that they were passed by recruiters for other students from others schools in town because they had 2 or more courses in COBOL!!! May I say more? Jaime Nino