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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,539c04254abf1b37 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-03-02 11:42:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsfeed0.news.atl.earthlink.net!news.atl.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail From: Richard Riehle Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: compiler benchmark comparisons (was: naval systems) Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 11:49:26 -0800 Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering Message-ID: <3C812CC6.5D72B62C@adaworks.com> References: <3C74E519.3F5349C4@baesystems.com> <3C7D37FD.F67F7067@despammed.com> <17247c3d.0202271553.68aaf78d@posting.google.com> <338040f8.0202271819.373f733a@Organization: LJK Software <5ee5b646.0203011129.1bdbac56@posting.google.com> Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 9e.fc.c5.20 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 2 Mar 2002 19:41:59 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20701 Date: 2002-03-02T19:41:59+00:00 List-Id: Pascal Obry wrote: > And this can be said for many points. In almost all discussions I have with > co-workers about programing languages features, each time I show on advantage > in Ada I got something like "but this is also possible with XYZ language" ! The first time I encountered this argument, circa 1969, we were a Fortran shop with a new contract from the Navy for a specialized inventory control system. I was assigned project leader, and I suggested we do the project in COBOL instead of Fortran. There was no end of grumbling from the Fortranners who, every time I would identify a key benefit of COBOL for this project, would exclaim, "I can do that in Fortran." Nearly any problem that can be solved in one programming language can also be solved in any other language. That is, the solution for every programming problem is ultimately expressible in every other language. To defend one's choice of programming language using this rationale simply overlooks the more important question. Is language K more expressive of the problem to solution mapping than language P? Expressiveness is a far more important criterion than expressibility. In Ledgard's little diagram of soution-space mapped to problem-space, we see this issue in broad relief. There are, of course, trade-offs. One language may be more expressive than another, but may have insufficient built-in safeguards; or it may not have the critical mass in usage (e.g. Erlang), or it may have some other drawback. However, to say, "I can do that in my favorite language too," simply fails to recognize the deeper issues one must consider in selecting a programming language for a given project. Richard Riehle