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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,2a34b7ad6c6a0774 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.bt.com!news.bt.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 05:23:32 -0500 From: Brian Drummond Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Efficiency of code generated by Ada compilers Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 11:31:00 +0100 Reply-To: brian@shapes.demon.co.uk Message-ID: <36ff661okhf7j2i8oac0qbd9iq9k1ddvle@4ax.com> References: X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-AuthenticatedUsername: NoAuthUser X-Trace: sv3-U7LghYeup1X7TeEbvfnY9y7O+1EySxerKSqqEWAVWZLxlKm9k5Yqfft6/gKt7YBh3QOzI4vf617eRAW!mU4J00ZK2d+z7+9SePTfQE7UlINa3a0sUgBKHwxHjwAtpnyQq8ghAflpcMkhlm+GVWoyM5SLVPmo!hcc= X-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@btinternet.com X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13329 Date: 2010-08-15T11:31:00+01:00 List-Id: On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 02:58:11 +0100, "(see below)" wrote: >On 15/08/2010 01:58, in article irce665hsdkil92saql82nl41cc3vpbq1j@4ax.com, >>> Indeed. Though David Harland's ideas on programming language design were >>> about as far removed from the Ada philosophy as it is possible to get. >> >> I'm not so sure on *design* - the goals were largely to achieve expressive >> power, to give the programmer the best abstractions; >Yes, but I fear he was over-optimistic about the ability of most programmers >to design coherent and effective language extensions/features (as opposed to >application-oriented abstractions) for themselves. I think that's an interesting distinction - when are you extending the language, rather than abstracting over application details? Probably not for here and now. But - maybe I shouldn't say this - I see some echoes of David's arguments when Dmitry Kazakov is expressing frustration at Ada's limitations. >We had many an argument >about that. I think the history of programming languages supports my >pessimism. Ada stands out, head and shoulders above the other 700K >programming languages. Yes, there is no doubt that Ada's complexity, though it was one of our drivers to simplify SW (especially compilers) at the expense of the HW, is no longer relevant. Compilers have advanced enormously, and machines can run them fast enough! However I think the way Ada developed in 95 and 2005 brings it much closer to the expressive power he was seeking, without compromising on its compile time strengths. But, I am told, writing astronomy books is more fun anyway. Thanks for sharing memories, - Brian