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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,21960280f1d61e84
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Harald Korneliussen" <vintermann@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
Date: 24 Jan 2007 23:52:08 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <1169711528.721673.323550@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
References: <1169531612.200010.153120@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <1169588206.234714.312650@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
   <T7mdnTQ-XfZMFCvYnZ2dnUVZ8tDinZ2d@bt.com>
   <1169624573.534128.172610@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>
   <87sle0sv9o.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
   <j7wt3c1v4p.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
   <45B761D2.1090509@obry.net>
   <0iy7nsfpic.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
   <45B795EE.3040700@obry.net>
   <owd55448ct.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
   <45B7A0ED.3050303@obry.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.184.192.82
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1169711549 12252 127.0.0.1 (25 Jan 2007 07:52:29
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 07:52:29 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <45B7A0ED.3050303@obry.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; nb-NO;
 rv:1.8.1.1) Gecko/20061204 Firefox/2.0.0.1,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=213.184.192.82;
   posting-account=5vUApw0AAADF5Kx_4-L9ZPdL9lZywYoQ
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8535
Date: 2007-01-24T23:52:08-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



On 24 Jan, 19:09, Pascal Obry <pas...@obry.net> wrote:
> For me, a high expressiveness in a
> programming language is how easy/simple it is to declare something that
> can be quite complex underneath.
>

But does that really matter all that much, as long as there are good
means of abstraction? I'd say that functional languages do perhaps have
an advantage there --- from the little I've tried, it seems that they
have some genuinely different ways of gluing things together.
Combinator-based parsing libraries would be an example. Amazing stuff,
which is not feasible in Ada or C++ (you could probably torture
templates into doing it in C++, but I don't count that as feasible).
But you can't easily do low-level stuff in them, which you can in Ada,
and although the type system in Ada is less extensible, it also has
some lovely features like the Positive numeric type, which can probably
be emulated in Haskell, but usually aren't.