Re: What is wrong with Ada?

[Georg Bauhaus <bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 00:15 +0200, Markus E Leypold wrote:
> > I can follow Pascal's questions as an expression of a valid observation,
> > maybe even an observation with sufficient statistical reliability.
> 
> And your point is? 

With all due respect, my points.


> George -- As much as I like a good flame war or an intelligent
> conversation (there is even a certain amount of overlap) -- this time
> I'll not fall for your attempt :-).

I'm only trying to put what I think could be substance to your
arguments which I think can be turned into meaningful, comparable
observations.

>  You talk as if there is just some data around
> te corner.

There are data, if "tentative" is the right qualification for criteria
used in comparing SE (idiomatic Ada, superhuman diligence C, etc.)
to frowned upon coding.

> we end up with "culture" arguments which
> a malleable without end almost by definition. 

Not by the definitions I know.
Watch "anger" (because of Ada), "work", "most of the time",
and "better" in these quotes:

"Anger induced by compilers refusing to compile sources", and
"The code then worked most of the time", and
"In the end, the programmers said that this new-to-them approach
worked  better (for the coding result)."

AFAIK, this isn't a singular observation when switching from a
"permissive language" to a "grumbling language" like Ada.
Anger, for sure, is not a compiler thing, and has been measured
before. Etc..

>  if you compare SE with
> psychology (empirical studies on not so hard subjects) or natural
> science (empirical studies on lots of hard subjects). 

Hard subjects like fluid dynamics or breaking distance prediction?
I could add another question to Pascal's list on scientific pride
in this regard. OTOH, no reason to stop trying to find what it is
that makes a base type system like that of Ada empirically superior
where  superiority is measured as in the recent report on comparing
embedded systems classes using C to those using Ada, other things
being equal. Using an Ada mode of expression appears to entail
better results sooner and more frequently. (Even if other languages
have this mode of expression, too, the observation means something!)

Going from

  type Percent is digits 7 range 0.0 .. 100.0;
    -- ...


  P: Percent;

to

  <nothing>


  float p;  /* ... */

doesn't imply different executable programs. But it does
imply a different mode of expression that is not necessitated
by the properties of the respective programming languages.
(I could have written P: Float; in the first example, and could have
introduced a type alias in the second at least.)
Given a frequency distribution of these styles, we might conclude
there is a culture thing (because modes of expression imply different
non-technical backgrounds) or not.
 Source code is available on-line, and near your workplace.