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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: 4 beginner's questions on the PL Ada Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 00:23:00 +0200 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: <8738qhnq2j.fsf@VLAN-3434.student.uu.se> References: <87ob96ajv6.fsf@VLAN-3434.student.uu.se> <03ea570b-e45f-4694-ab9b-3413c4770379@googlegroups.com> <878v0aee8i.fsf@VLAN-3434.student.uu.se> <87txiycxx9.fsf@VLAN-3434.student.uu.se> <2531ecb1-4ac0-404a-8229-3110d4268374@googlegroups.com> <87mwoqbao2.fsf@VLAN-3434.student.uu.se> <878v0977q2.fsf@VLAN-3434.student.uu.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: SWN/nubmpQxYKwY7hPy4YA.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:0HmH4VJ49FZlgbjOOLv/ZZN6utc= Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:16793 Date: 2013-08-11T00:23:00+02:00 List-Id: Dennis Lee Bieber writes: > And that description is rather meaningless to me... > > C-style for loops pretty much mandate breaking apart into parts > as they ARE so generic. Yes, I think it is clear by now that we prefer to describe things in different ways. > Code is IMPLEMENTATION... OK, then what is not? Modelling? Drawing UML diagrams on whiteboards? Or keeping it in your head, but still doing it in stages? Well, I don't do it in stages, I do everything at once, namely, when I write code. I do it bottom-up, like the Unix way of small, unique tools with a common IF, and then you add complexity not by making a new tool, but by combining those that you have. Perhaps you do it top-down? I never did that, but then, I suspect modelling and verification are motivated, at least to a higher degree than with the bottom-up approach (in what case I think modelling is a waste of time, and UML a joke). On the whole, I don't like modelling. I think its importance is exaggerated to the outmost. (But for commercial RT systems, that cannot be easily patched (or revoked), and where human safety is involved, I see the point of it.) I don't prefer C++ to C, and I would only use Java on a sinking ship. The real time/concurrent model of real time and/or distributed systems are a lot more appealing to me than the OO model, but I know too little of it to say for sure. Most of all, I like C and Lisp (which I don't consider FP any more than plain procedural/imperative). > Programming takes place outside of any language; one maps > algorithms into the language specific syntax/semantics to > implement the algorithm (program/recipe). I agree that all programming is the same, only, again, I don't map, to me it is all a mental-physical activity that has become one (if it ever was separated). Also, algorithms, as in CS - with hash tables, greedy traversal of balanced search trees, all that stuff - that's exaggerated, and often but an academic discipline. Programming is in general not that advanced. I don't map algorithms into code. The little I think, I think in code. The rest I write. -- Emanuel Berg - programmer (hire me! CV below) computer projects: http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 internet activity: http://home.student.uu.se/embe8573