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,c1983ae2deb642ab X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-25 10:37:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!netnews.com!xfer02.netnews.com!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: Ada -vs- GNAT Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 10:38:13 -0700 Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering Message-ID: <3CEFCC05.16C30A69@adaworks.com> References: Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 41.b2.6d.27 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 25 May 2002 17:36:09 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24781 Date: 2002-05-25T17:36:09+00:00 List-Id: tmoran@acm.org wrote: > Which is like being a little bit pregnant. It means the potential user > must: switch to Gnat; start a new branch of the update tree; or not use > your package. It makes life simpler for you, harder for your users, and > (possibly) richer for ACT. Just remember all those consequences of your > decision. Let me take a Devil's advocate position for a change. Some years ago, Bill Joy gave a talk at an ACM meeting where he lambasted the idea of standards. He is not alone in this view. For many software developers, standards simply inhibit creativity, not to mention productivity. We often cite the ISO standardization of Ada as a positive feature of the language, while others cite the standardization of C++ as a handicap. In an article in THINK magazine in 1964, someone wrote, "The last act of a dying organization is to enlarge the rule book." Many of us have seen that happen where a company on the brink of bankruptcy suddenly begins to enforce its dress code or work-hour rules. It may be that the last act of a dying computer language is to seek ISO standardization. One reason for the reaction against traditional software engineering in the Agile Programming movement is the inability to get things done using the formalisms and standards that keep popping up to thwart success. XP is a reaction to the Industrial Engineering model that has characterized so much software engineering practice. When a Standard keeps a language from meeting its full potential, is that a good thing. When we insist that no construct may be used that is not in the standard, is that not like saying we abhor innovation. I once noted, while working on an Army project, that the military is one of those places where innovation lasts -- and lasts -- and lasts. We can all think of times when bureaucratic trifles prevented some good idea from going forward. Ceremony may be useful as a way of comforting the uneasy with a sense of the familiar, but it does little to promote progress. So, it ACT deems it useful to add something as simply as attibutes to its compiler to accomplish things not pre-determined by the standard, so be it. This could be one of the features that differentiates their product from that of other compiler publishers. If I recall correctly, the Ada standard recognizes the reality that there may be occasional needs to stray from the strict canon of the standard. Let's not be the kind of people for who innovation lasts -- and lasts -- and lasts. Richard Riehle