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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_RANDY 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 X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2000-10-16 17:50:09 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!bignews.mediaways.net!news.nikoma.de!tiscalinetde!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!grolier!fr.usenet-edu.net!usenet-edu.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail From: Robert Dewar Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.os.qnx Subject: Re: Ada and QNX Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 00:39:00 GMT Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. Message-ID: <8sg733$fe2$1@nnrp1.deja.com> References: <8r1i82$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> NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14 X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Oct 17 00:39:00 2000 GMT X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.61 [en] (OS/2; I) X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x64.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:1311 comp.os.qnx:2949 Date: 2000-10-17T00:39:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <39EB42B1.A14BDCB6@motorola.com>, Igor Kovalenko wrote: > 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. One is tempted to suppose a smiley is meant here, but other evidence in Igor's posts make it clear that he certainly has NOT read an Ada book carefully, so who knows? > > > 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++. Things seem to become obvious to you in mysterious ways, certainly objective information does not seem to be an ingrediant in this process. The above statement is complete nonsense. Actually in my experience, Ada programs in general tend to use far more of Ada than is true in the case of C++. I see lots and lots of C++ programs that just completely ignore very important parts of the language, including for example, exceptions, name spaces, and the standard template library, and indeed inheritance for many programs. > 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. I am beginning to think this is all a big joke, I think that it is likely that Igor is just having fun in trolling. Since it is hard to believe that anyone could be this blatant in forming bogus conclusions with no data (note that Igor has not even given a TRACE of evidence that he knows anything about Ada other than how to properly case the name of the language). > Note that strictly speaking I never said Ada is wrong thing in > general, Given that you don't know Ada, that's probably wise, one of the few wise decisions represented here. > I just stated that it is not good for my personal taste. Of course you have no way of knowing this, but I find many people find that it is convenient to dismiss languages without knowing them (and before the Ada folks join in righteous agreement, hands up all those who are sure COBOL is junk but don't know it!) > My original intention was not to denounce Ada, but to say that > pissing on C++ does not do any good for Ada. I am reminded of Lieberman saying in a recent speach that he would not criticize Bush, but would criticize his record. It is definitely a bad idea to just generally denounce C++ without knowing it, and those who do, don't help and just make themselves look silly (as Igor does when he generally denounces Ada -- although if this is a clever troll, then hats off, because it is very well done :-) On the other hand if you DO know C++ well, it is quite in bounds to specifically point out what is wrong with it. If you really *do* know both languages, this is not hard to do! > 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 :) Not if you were deliberately trolling :-) Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.