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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-30 06:33:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!feeder.via.net!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!206.13.28.144!news.pacbell.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3B656345.64AB603A@sneakemail.com> From: Russ Paielli <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.3-20mdk i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: How to make Ada a dominant language References: <3B6555ED.9B0B0420@sneakemail.com> <9k3l9r$10i2$1@pa.aaanet.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 06:38:13 -0700 NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.194.87.148 X-Complaints-To: abuse@pacbell.net X-Trace: news.pacbell.net 996500009 63.194.87.148 (Mon, 30 Jul 2001 06:33:29 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 06:33:29 PDT Organization: SBC Internet Services Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10742 Date: 2001-07-30T06:38:13-07:00 List-Id: Gary Lisyansky wrote: > > "Russ Paielli" <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> wrote in message > news:3B6555ED.9B0B0420@sneakemail.com... > > Preben Randhol wrote: > > > > Honestly now, which of the following two statements is cleaner and > > > > clearer? > > > > > > > > count: integer := 0; -- old syntax > > > > > > Reads: Count is integer and set is to 0 > > > > > > > > > > > integer: count = 0 -- new syntax > > > > > > Reads: Integer count equals 0 > > > > > > I prefer the old way, as it is easier to read. > > > > I'll bet nine out of 10 non-Ada-programmers would disagree with you. And > > that's part of the reason that nine out of ten programmers (or whatever) > > are non-Ada-programmers. > > Dubious. In reality, only C/C++/Java use this "type first" order in > declarations. Pascal uses Ada- like syntax, VB uses even more verbose > construct (Dim Count As Integer) and so on. I've never heard anyone complain > about "var name first" declaration convention. Yes, and how popular is Pascal? How popular is C/C++? Thanks for making my point. > > > > > Why is it so very important to use = to set a value and then == when you > > > check it? I have not understood this. > > > > Because "=" is the simplest fricking symbol that could possibly be used > > for assignment. Why is this so hard for Ada programmers to understand? > > What's so great about ":="? Why not use "$=" or "%="? > > It's a change for the sake of change. It doesn't eliminate any serious > verbosity. ":=" is simply traditional. It's a change for the sake of simplicity. Einstein said, "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." > > > > > I don't at all agree that one should change the syntax. There is no need > > > to make the programs less readable. You should read your source code > > > more often than you write it. Besides none of these changes will make > > > Ada more popular, it will only make it a yet-another-language. Now Ada > > > has advantages over other languages and one is that it is highly > readable. > > > > What I am proposing would not make programs "less readable." It would > > make them MORE readable, especially for new Ada programmers. If > > long-time Ada programmers are unable to see that, I believe Ada will > > become an obscure niche language, like HAL or Jovial. That would be a > > terrible shame, because Ada has excellent fundamentals and could become > > a dominant language. > > Frankly, I think that lack of popularity of Ada has literally nothing to do > with any of the "issues" that you've listed. "Literally nothing," eh? Open your eyes, before your next job requires you to use C++ or Java! Ada is a great language and it was mandated by the DoD for years, yet it is still used very little by hackers or hobbyists. What could explain that other than the tacky syntax? Russ