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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,e59a9d893a249e86 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-17 15:15:42 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: Outside view (still): Development process in the Ada community Date: 17 Apr 2002 15:15:42 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0204171415.18ac5e85@posting.google.com> References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.244 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1019081742 17298 127.0.0.1 (17 Apr 2002 22:15:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Apr 2002 22:15:42 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22680 misc.misc:6506 Date: 2002-04-17T22:15:42+00:00 List-Id: "Kent Paul Dolan" wrote in message news:... > I thought this snippet of an email from the Ratio Group made an > interesting commentary along the same lines; the problem of "too brittle > ... too rigid" in a dynamic world seems to be generic, not limited to > the Ada language capabilities development process. Well that's certainly a reach! The quote is about software being too brittle and too rigid. From the point of view of the Ada community we would argue that Ada is all about avoiding such problems. The idea that the Ada language is itself brittle and rigid is unrelated (and also not supportable in my view). What makes languages brittle is when they accumulate ill thought out junk that does not work well and cannot be easily modified.