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: 103376,84bf0ec36cf20893 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-14 07:21:44 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Would an *AdaScript* language be a good / bad idea? Date: 14 May 2002 07:21:43 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0205140621.7c272d61@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.244 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1021386104 13238 127.0.0.1 (14 May 2002 14:21:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 May 2002 14:21:44 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:24020 Date: 2002-05-14T14:21:44+00:00 List-Id: Ingo Marks wrote in message news:... > Look at Adaed: > > ftp://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/devel/lang/ada > > Title: Ada/Ed > Version: 1.12 > Entered-date: 28JUN99 > Description: Ada95 interpreter This is a highly uninformed comment. For sure, the poster has not followed his own advice (and looked at Adaed). The fact that Adaed is interpreted is entirely irrelevant to this discussion. Adaed is a full implementation of Ada 83. It is not suitable for any kind of production use, and is even less suitable as either a scripting language or the basis for a scripting language. The notion of high level weakly typed scripting languages and the notion of interpretation are orthogonal. There are fully compiled high level weakly typed language implementations (e.g. SPITBOL/360), and fully interpreted strongly typed low level languages (e.g. Java!)