Re: += in ada

[Marin David Condic <nobody@noplace.com>]

Aside from these legitimate arguments, there is one other: Its really 
easy to succumb to the temptation to try to please everyone and end up 
with garbage as a result. I'm sure we could find a steady stream of C++ 
fans who would say "Ada would be better if only it had a "+=" operator." 
and "Ada would be better if only it used "{" and "}" instead of "begin" 
and "end"..." and "Ada would be better if only it used "*" instead of 
'Address/access..." All that amounts to saying is "Ada would be better 
if only it were the language I *really* want to use - C++"

We couldn't start changing Ada to look like C++ to win over the C++ 
fans. It would either become C++ or it would remain Ada with a bizarre 
hodge-podge syntax that would be neither Ada nor C++. In either case, 
the C++ fans still wouldn't like Ada because they'd hate its type model 
or its generics or its tasking model or something else far more profound 
than its syntax.

People have not avoided Ada over its syntax. They've avoided it for much 
bigger reasons than that. Changing the syntax would only overwork the 
compiler writers, piss off the existing users and make no new batch of 
converts as an end result.

MDC

Robert I. Eachus wrote:
> I had about decided to let this topic die a graceful death when Chad R. 
> Meiners wrote:
> 
>> People that use Ada are people that feel safety and maintenance are
>> important characteristics of a programming language.
> 

-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic
I work for: http://www.belcan.com/
My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm

Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g

     "All reformers, however strict their social conscience,
      live in houses just as big as they can pay for."

          --Logan Pearsall Smith
======================================================================