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,e61c8636ef35379d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-16 12:51:07 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!falcon.america.net!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail From: mark_lundquist@my-deja.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Examples in Docs, was Re: Escape Sequences in Strings Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 20:44:46 GMT Organization: Deja.com Message-ID: <942brr$b0t$1@nnrp1.deja.com> References: <93objj$guk$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93q77h$rr6$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <940f9j$nj2$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <940n0u$tnf$1@nnrp1.deja.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 130.213.202.184 X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Jan 16 20:44:46 2001 GMT X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows NT; DigExt) X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x59.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 130.213.202.184 X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDmark_lundquist Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:4069 Date: 2001-01-16T20:44:46+00:00 List-Id: In article <940n0u$tnf$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar wrote: > > I am not sure there is really any specific connection > between examples in documents and comments in code. Not a connection, an analogy. With respect to the function of a program, comments are superfluous; with respect to the language definition, examples are superfluous. But of course the purpose of a program and the purpose of a language definition are not the same :-) > > Going back to my original comment, I again stress that > I perfectly well understand that my taste is not typical > here. I doubt there are many people who learned COBOL > from the ANSI standard (as I did :-) You're probably right, not many... :-) Wanting examples in the RM is absurd because it's to say "I want to learn the language from the definition", then to turn around and say "I don't like this standard, it doesn't have enough examples for me to learn the language from"! You want to learn it from the LRM, fair enough, but then you have take it on its own terms, i.e. a definition w/o the redundant bloat of examples! > [...] Actually there are > few programmers who really thoroughly know the semantics > of the language they are using. > To digress... :-) Although I've used C++, I don't really know it, and my study of it impressed me that to really understand C++ requires more intelligence than I'm possessed of -- or at least, more brain cells than I could spare to devote to the task. It seems like in order to do even fundamental things reasonably well in C++, you have to wrap your brain around all kinds of deep and intertwined details about the meanings of references, const, temporaries, construction and destruction in general, copy constructors in particular, etc., etc. Maybe it's just me and I have yet to get "closure" on it in a way that all those details can stay with me. Maybe Ada's the same way and I'm just no longer aware of it. Maybe the vast ocean of C++ programmers really *are* that much smarter than me... Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/