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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: ian@rsd.bel.alcatel.be (Ian Ward) Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because... Date: 1996/07/08 Message-ID: <4rr961$hdk@btmpjg.god.bel.alcatel.be>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 167200856 distribution: world references: <31e02c32.342948604@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> organization: Alcatel Bell Telephone reply-to: ian@rsd.bel.alcatel.be newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Date: 1996-07-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article 342948604@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov, kdq@emoryi.jpl.nasa.gov (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: >On Fri, 5 Jul 1996 09:29:56 +0100, Peter Amey wrote: >>"The superior pilot uses his superior judgement to avoid situations that >>would require his superior skill" >> >>I use Ada precisely because it avoids the need constantly to demonstrate >>my superior skill :-) > >I do the same in C. The problem is that Ada won't *let* you use your superior >skill, i.e., nothing is gained by it. For someone who knows what they're >doing, it's just as easy to write good, clean, safe code in C (or assembly, or >*any* language) as it is in Ada. > It is possible, but not as easy; Each language, assuming it actually was designed, was designed for a certain reason, it therefore stands to reason that some languages must be, on average, empirically easier to use than others. I'm not the only person to think so, either. If you don't believe me, read Byte July 1996, page 163. (Not that I totally agree with what Mr. Pournelle says, but his views are derived from the fact that he finds Visual Basic easier to produce simple apps on his machine, than he does with some other language.) For further information, in fact the only study I know of, NOT based on heresay, check out http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/docs/reports/cada/cada_art.html I don't deny the principle of what you are saying, that geniuses get less help from helpful languages, than ordinary people, but they still get some help, and 50% of programmers are below average. >-- >#include http://emoryi.jpl.nasa.gov/ > _ >Kevin D Quitt USA 91351-4454 96.37% of all statistics are made up >Per the FCA, this email address may not be added to any commercial mail list --- Ian Ward's opinions only : ian@rsd.bel.alcatel.be 50% of programmers REALLY are below average.