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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.50.50.237 with SMTP id f13mr9074295igo.5.1403571862404;
 Mon, 23 Jun 2014 18:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.182.29.38 with SMTP id g6mr60080obh.12.1403571862307; Mon,
 23 Jun 2014 18:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!uq10no6547216igb.0!news-out.google.com!qf4ni15igc.0!nntp.google.com!uq10no6547205igb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 18:04:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <lyoaxjgupb.fsf@pushface.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=71.252.147.203;
 posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.252.147.203
References: <lmj8s6$hhp$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <255b51cd-b23f-4413-805a-9fea3c70d8b2@googlegroups.com>
 <ln6uv9$bk8$1@dont-email.me>
 <b22db9fb-a73d-438a-8cfd-f0bb1db70eed@googlegroups.com>
 <MPElv.491358$1w1.428312@fx03.iad>
 <5ebe316d-cd84-40fb-a983-9f953f205fef@googlegroups.com>
 <ln7ngt$c8a$1@dont-email.me>
 <2100734262424129975.133931laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org>
 <lnn5ko$ner$1@loke.gir.dk> <lnn8ff$k42$1@dont-email.me>
 <lnq58f$du2$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <lnsqus$d4j$1@dont-email.me> <lntmdq$p1j$1@loke.gir.dk>
 <lo7c2h$ura$1@dont-email.me>
 <lo7pea$cm3$1@loke.gir.dk> <c0pv51Ff927U1@mid.individual.net>
 <5156oy7vhg99.17wu6q2ef45ke.dlg@40tude.net> <ly1tufj2nh.fsf@pushface.org>
 <18et97c0c22vc$.y98lxxfblijn.dlg@40tude.net>
 <08f83f70-ccb1-45ec-8a4c-46e3442745b8@googlegroups.com>
 <z1m6gd8qqayi.2gh0016k5w5w.dlg@40tude.net> <lyoaxjgupb.fsf@pushface.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3121768b-1d29-4b5c-be9f-574a9c53504c@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Ada platforms and pricing, was: Re: a new language, designed for
 safety !
From: "Dan'l Miller" <optikos@verizon.net>
Injection-Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 01:04:22 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:187211
Date: 2014-06-23T18:04:21-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Monday, June 23, 2014 4:52:16 PM UTC-5, Simon Wright wrote:
> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" writes:
>=20
> > Egh? Ada lacks nothing for programming FSM. It has:
> > 1. gotos and labels
> > 2. access to subprogram type
> > 3. dispatching
>=20
> > Ada has enumeration types so that states could be named. Ada has the ca=
se
> > statement checking all alternatives. Ada has ranges in case statement i=
n
> > order to specify subsets of states and subtypes to name such subsets.
>=20
> > Thus either possible way of implementing FSM is fully, totally, and
> > exhaustively supported in Ada.
>=20
> You're describing the assembly language of state machines. Higher-level
> constructs are needed.

Simon, those were my (unexpressed) thoughts exactly upon reading Dmitry's d=
escription of the contortions needed to represent FSMs in Ada, C, C++, and =
so forth (ignoring the different contortions in Erlang and Boost.MSM and F#=
/OCaml).  Btw, here are the F#/OCaml and Erlang contortions that look quite=
 different than {Ada, C, C++}'s traditional implementation of FSMs as condi=
tional branches cased over a set of enumerations:  http://theburningmonk.co=
m/2012/07/a-simple-finite-state-machine-in-erlang-and-f of which only the F=
# variant *might* be argued to be a perhaps-more-intuitive improvement due =
to syntactic compactness over a sophisticated richness of an asynchrony fea=
ture-set.  FSMs in Ada202X should be drastically more intuitive & direct th=
an even the F# and Erlang representations.