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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,df854b5838c3e14
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,948c42d74a60770e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: jmartin@cs.ucla.edu (Jay Martin)
Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada
Date: 1996/03/16
Message-ID: <4if97t$1cqm@saba.info.ucla.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 144409197
references: <00001a73+00002504@msn.com> <4ica32INN5hn@gambier.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>
 <4icja9$1r92@saba.info.ucla.edu> <4idh80$6tj@solutions.solon.com>
 <4idk8oINNrr2@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>
organization: University of California, Los Angeles
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Date: 1996-03-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) writes:

> >Like all tools, lex and yacc are excellent for some tasks, and useless
> >for others.  I can only assume you've been trying to use them for
> >inappropriate tasks, or more likely, that you haven't ever used them,
> >and that you're not familiar with C, either.  You've posted many
> >claims, with *no* documentation, *no* examples, and *no* rationale.

>That trick allows an author to retreat infinitely without admitting he is
>wrong, because there is no wall to back into.  ``But I never said this or
>that...''. Of course not. Didn't say a damn thing, in fact.  Without the
>documentation, examples and whatnot, it is just *.advocacy fluff.

Alright dumbshits lesson time:

  -- Tools and operating systems that only support one language are junk.
     Basic computer science, anyone who thinks otherwise is incompetent.
  
  -- Stupidly go on and on about how an certain IO routine is not as fast
     as Lex, not too swift.  (1) Won't matter if your reading in 1K.
     (2) Just shows the IO routine is broken.  Its trivia.
   
  -- Go on and on how its great to over-engineer something simple.
     How great it is to be a "savant" at a criptic tool with little
     eye to the effects of using that tool to the maintainability
     of the software.  This is called "eat shit next guy" hacking.

Of course when you tell of maintainance headaches caused by abuse of
these tools do to they are ready availability and it is supposed to be
so cool to use them.  Then its the usual C/Unix hacker macho attitude
of "they are just lame programmers" the tools are great!  

The Unix philosophy is great for the quick hack, but for larger
software development the philosophy becomes counter productive.