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=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!daveb From: daveb@geac.UUCP (David Collier-Brown) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Typing Ada Message-ID: <2780@geac.UUCP> Date: 26 May 88 12:40:39 GMT Article-I.D.: geac.2780 Posted: Thu May 26 08:40:39 1988 References: <12400764147.13.RCONN@SIMTEL20> <25135.580491166@mbunix> <1017@cresswell.quintus.UUCP> Reply-To: daveb@geac.UUCP (David Collier-Brown) Organization: The Geac Pretty Picture Department List-Id: In article <25135.580491166@mbunix>, munck@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA (Bob Munck) writes: | People can "read" | pictures better than words in a row; machines, until recently, couldn't | do anything at all with pictures and could handle only very simple | sequences of words (programming languages). I think it likely that Ada | will be the LAST major one-dimensional programming language. In article <1017@cresswell.quintus.UUCP> ok@quintus.UUCP (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes: | People can read *some* *small* pictures better than they can read text | conveying the same information. But it doesn't seem plausible to me that | a program which would have been say 50k lines of ADA would be easy to | follow as a collection of several thousand pictures. I think you're both right. Details are often best shown in text, general structure in pictures. I'd certainly prefer to walk a call/rendesvous structure in pictoral form than by reading text, and reason about the details by reading code and not pictographs. --dave (horses for courses, perhaps) c-b -- David Collier-Brown. {mnetor yunexus utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers Ltd., | "His Majesty made you a major 350 Steelcase Road, | because he believed you would Markham, Ontario. | know when not to obey his orders"