Re: Advanced scripting languages (was: Learning Ada83)

["Ken O. Burtch" <kburtch@sympatico.ca>]

Randy Brukardt wrote:
> 
> "Kevin Cline" <kevin.cline@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e749549b.0409041928.67714f9b@posting.google.com...
> > "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote in message
> news:<taKdnQ2WrI_qn6TcRVn-sA@megapath.net>...
> > > "Bj�rn Persson" <spam-away@nowhere.nil> wrote in message
> > > news:7g2_c.102478$dP1.364156@newsc.telia.net...
> > > Marius Amado Alves wrote:
> > >
> > > >>> It would also be useful and practical to learn one of the advanced
> > > >>> scripting languages like Perl or Python or Ruby....
> > > >>
> > > >> Wow, they're *advanced* scripting languages now!
> > > >
> > > >Sure, a *lot* more advanced than bat files. ;-)
> > >
> > > That's funny, because if it's complicated enough that I can't write a
> batch
> > > file to do it, I'll generally write it in Ada. Bat has If and Goto, and
> that
> > > is enough for simple tasks. Beyond that, I want to be able to fix it and
> be
> > > able to insure that it works...
> >
> > Strong typing is handy, but it's not enough to ensure that something
> > works.  Ada has it's strengths, but it's not the tool for every job.
> > Why would you spend an hour writing 50 or 100 lines of Ada code when
> > five minutes and a five-line Perl script would do the job?
> 
> Because it would take a week to learn Perl well enough to use it that way.
> And it is very rare that such a program is never used again; my one
> experience with Perl showed it to be a write-only language (it took me two
> weeks to successfully modify the code that runs the CVS on the ada-auth.org
> site). And it is very rare that I need to write a 100 line throwaway
> program; most of my code has much more permanence than that. Summary: It
> doesn't make sense for me. YMMV.
> 
>                            Randy.

On a rare visit to comp.lang.ada, Ken writes...

The documentation for the AdaScript Business Shell
(http://www.pegasoft.ca/bush.html) contains several arguments against
tools like Perl in favor of Ada-based scripting languages, including:

1. Lower learning curve (a BUSH for loop is an Ada for loop)
2. Lower overall cost for maintaining a script project over its lifetime
3. Error messages that work for you, not against you
4. Better readability when debugging other people's scripts.
5. Sensible syntax shortcuts designed to be typo-resistant.
6. Better portability.
7. Code reuse.

When you look at the big picture, Perl projects increase costs and
development time.  As always, use the right tool for the job.  But my
experience with Perl development over the past 2 years has been
negative.  The idea of a 5 line Perl script to replace 100 lines of Ada
is a myth.

Ken B.
Author of "Linux Shell Scripting with Bash"

-- 
Ken O. Burtch: http://www.pegasoft.ca               : Pegasoft
Linux Shell Scripting with Bash / Business Shell    : R.R.#1
Bio: 38;Bsc,UI,Lang,Games;Toons,Elves,SF,Pizza;Xian : Jordan Station, ON
````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Canada L0R 1S0