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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5f8432149982f35e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fca1b,5f8432149982f35e X-Google-Attributes: gidfca1b,public From: mjsilva@my-deja.com Subject: Re: Ada and QNX Date: 2000/10/16 Message-ID: <8sfm52$f4$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 682178881 References: <8r1i82$ri3$1@kujawiak.man.lodz.pl> <8r5pe5$h70$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8FCDFD7EEnopenopena@63.209.170.206> <39EA6305.CD5CFE1F@ix.netcom.com> <39EA9161.6469DDE2@home.com> <8sf9p0$kpg$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <39EB42B1.A14BDCB6@motorola.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x63.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 206.169.137.75 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Oct 16 19:49:57 2000 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDmjsilva Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.os.qnx X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt) Date: 2000-10-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <39EB42B1.A14BDCB6@motorola.com>, Igor Kovalenko wrote: > mjsilva@my-deja.com wrote: > > > > In article <39EA9161.6469DDE2@home.com>, > > Igor Kovalenko wrote: > > > Oh, yeah. I bought Ada book some years ago. So many capabilities. > > Couple > > > hundred pages worth of docs printed in small-font. > > > > You bought -a- book!? You don't state that you've used Ada, or even > > that you know it, but only that you bought -a- book. And some years > > ago at that -- maybe it didn't even cover the current standard (Ada 95 > > vs. Ada 83). > > > > Sure, I bought a book simply to have it collect some dust. That's very > reasonable assumption given that such fat books are usually rather > expensive. I've got plenty of books collecting dust. I didn't buy them for that purpose, but that's the end result anyway. Rather than rely on readers' assumptions why not be more clear in your writing? > > > Since when does one need to know "the whole damn thing" to use any > > programming language or other complex tool? > > > > Since the time it became obvious that if you don't want the whole Ada > you might as well go with C/C++. When it comes to e.g. C++ do you feel equally compelled to know "the whole damn thing"? > > > > Ada is way too high and abstract to be good for system level > > programming > > > > What low-level system-programming functionality is missing in Ada? In > > fact Ada has more low-level functionality than C or C++. It was, after > > all, originally designed for -embedded- applications. > > > > I did not say anything is missing. I said that it is 'too high' which > should mean there is just too much stuff to bear along with what you > really need in most cases. OK, what 'too high' stuff must you bear in order to do system-level programming in Ada? > > Note that strictly speaking I never said Ada is wrong thing in general, > I just stated that it is not good for my personal taste. My original > intention was not to denounce Ada, but to say that pissing on C++ does > not do any good for Ada. I see, nobody seems to want to continue the > wedding analogy, but many are happy to let off some steam on me no > matter how many disclaimers I put. I guess it was mistake to give you > guys such an easy target :) If you'd like to have a serious discussion on the relative merits of C++ and Ada I'm sure this group can rise to the occasion. Informed criticism, BTW, is not the same as "pissing". Mike Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.