Re: How to make like Fortran "do i = 1,20,2"

[Gary Scott <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com>]

I performed a survey of some of my old code and my highest average usage
of DO-STEP was 1.6 percent in an application that required remapping
to/from internal representation to/from an external 8, 11, 16, 24, and
32-bit integer and floating point representation, some values of which
had to be split in odd places across 16-bit words (i.e. an 11 bit value
with 3 bits in one 16-bit word with the remaining bits in the next
16-bit word).  Not saying that I could not have designed the process
better, but what I designed was quite easy and straightforward and thus
not very error prone (IMO).

Gary Scott wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm an Ada supporter.  I'm very discouraged that many companies seem to
> be giving up on Ada in favor of C/C++.  I think that it's very short
> sighted and based upon a misguided, mis-application of object oriented
> design (in at least one case I'm familiar with where the code was
> essentially performance critical device drivers).
> 
> However, I'm also a Fortran 95/2K supporter.  It seems a much better fit
> for most of the engineering work that I do than any competing language.
> Of course there is baggage how can there not be but you don't have to
> use the obsolescent features.  Baggage is being designed out over time
> and I consider the latest standards to be vastly improved.  DO-STEP is
> definitely not part of the baggage, however.
> 
> Ehud Lamm wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Gary Scott wrote:
> >
> > |
> > |
> > |Matthew J Heaney wrote:
> > |>
> > |> Gary Scott <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com> writes:
> > |>
> > |> > Hmmm, these and similar examples posted do not make Ada look very
> > |> > elegant...it makes a very simple concept seem somewhat convoluted.
> > |>
> > |> This "very simpleconcept" is a major source of bugs -- that's why it's
> > |> not in the language.
> > |
> > |"Studies" of language usage and error inducing constructs can be made to
> > |support virtually any preconceived notion.  I'm more interested in
> > |producing the code that solves a particular problem in the easiest to
> > |understand and straightforward form rather than in the most elegant in
> > |terms of abstraction.
> >
> > Flawed studies, in any field, can prove anything you want...
> >
> > One of the nice things about programming is that you can choose from
> > different languages. If you find Ada a bad languaged - use something else!
> >
> > I usually find myself in agreement with the desginers of Ada. Sometimes
> > though, reaching this conclusion takes time and refelction.
> >
> > And remember: freedom of choice entails, of course, the freedom to choose
> > wrong.
> >
> > Ehud Lamm mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il
> > http://purl.oclc.org/NET/ehudlamm <== My home on the web
> > Check it out and subscribe to the E-List- for interesting essays and more!