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 X-Received: by 2002:a37:6d85:: with SMTP id i127mr67726589qkc.74.1564257829769; Sat, 27 Jul 2019 13:03:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:39a6:: with SMTP id y35mr11309500otb.81.1564257829508; Sat, 27 Jul 2019 13:03:49 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!b26no8575901qtq.0!news-out.google.com!a5ni152qtd.0!nntp.google.com!b26no8575899qtq.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2019 13:03:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.223.245; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.223.245 References: <01e1fc91-a20e-4b48-a10e-57d3935cd06c@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <87dbe692-b66c-4ba9-ad4a-e933e817aef9@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Microsoft is considering moving to Rust; potential opportunity for Ada2020 From: Optikos Injection-Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2019 20:03:49 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56975 Date: 2019-07-27T13:03:49-07:00 List-Id: On Friday, July 26, 2019 at 9:11:33 AM UTC-5, Shark8 wrote: > On Wednesday, July 17, 2019 at 12:17:45 PM UTC-6, Optikos wrote: > > https://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-to-explore-using-rust >=20 > Of possible interest is this discussion on xlang: > https://github.com/Microsoft/xlang/issues/226 Shark8, thank you for engaging Microsoft on this topic; many valid & useful= critiques were raised. 16 days ago, it was closed due to the gist of the = replies being philosophical design. I would recommend shifting strategies = to the following: 1) Find concrete examples of where slang's current approach to types will m= isbehave or be less than fully useful or, best yet, be a total unmitigated = disaster. 2) Aim straight for the jugular vein in as tight of language as possible. = Give concrete ugliest vile examples in real code snippets in slang's favori= te top-priority programming languages (e.g., Python, Javascript, C++). The= examples should be nasty push-comes-to-shove total embarrassments of the c= urrent approach to types in xlang interior between languages (and library A= PIs thereof). 3) Despite #2 being the worst bad news that we can find, #2's wording shoul= d always be polite, short & to-the-point, and service-with-a-smile, emphasi= zing the wow-factor of in the tone of: =E2=80=9CGee, that looks like a bad = situation that you & your type system got yourself into; how are you going = to get out of =E2=80=A2that=E2=80=A2 tight spot without Ada's subtype capab= ilities? Good luck with that! You realize that the solution to this probl= em's path is already blazed in Ada's wise subtype system, don't you? Of co= urse, we could stand on the shoulders of Ada-giants that came before decade= s ago, instead of trying to reinvent the square-wheel badly.=E2=80=9D But = not in that direct wording=E2=80=94more polite & oblique than that, but wit= h the same import & meaning. 4) Enter each example as a new defect-issue number, instead of a rambling l= itany-list of minor issues. Make xlang's leadership sweat each defect as a= stand-alone separate mess in a review meeting with their peers & bosses, r= ather than simply deftly closing the issue as off-topic =E2=80=9Cdesign=E2= =80=9D.