Re: [OT] interesting reason why a language is considered good

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:48:04 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> On 16.04.12 12:43, Marius Amado-Alves wrote:
>> Love OT threads in this clever forum:-)
>> 
>> Actually there is a bit of thruth in the absurd no keyword thing:
>> *many* keywords can get in the way of naming identifiers. Ada, for one,
>> has a bit too many keywords, with some good identifier candidates (when,
>> others...)
> 
> "when" and "others" are general abstractions. What kind
> of programs will in effect be about general abstractions?

The kind of programs in Ada language, which uses exactly these words. Your 
argument is bogus. If a reserved word is good for the language then it is 
good for a program in that language.

Furthermore if "when" is bad, then "what", "who" etc should be too. Yet, 
they are not reserved.

The purpose of words being reserved has nothing to do with words. It does 
1) with readability, to clearly separate identifiers from other syntactic 
tokens in order to improve readability. 2) With syntax issues, to make 
grammar less ambiguous for the parser.

The reason #1 does not stand anymore because programs are read in IDEs. It 
was different in 70s, the era of punched cards and typewriters.

The reason #2 is still valid, but it does not require that huge amount of 
reserved words Ada has, maybe only a half of them or less.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de