Re: Misconception about Ada?

[dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner)]

On 11 Feb 2001 18:30:30 -0500, Robert Deininger <rdeininger@mindspring.com> wrote:
>I take it this is the part you don't like:
>
>"The arguments against C and C++ apply with equal force to other
>conventional compiled languages such as Pascal, Ada, Algol, PL/I, Fortran,
>and compiled Basic dialects. Despite occasional heroic efforts such as the
>Eiffel/Sather family, the differences between conventional languages remain
>superficial when set against their basic design decision to leave memory
>management to the programmer. . .

My problem here is (a) he includes buffer overruns in memory management, 
which is not a problem for at least Pascal and Ada, and (b) Eiffel and
Sather are both garbage collected languages, which, with their other
features, means they don't leave memory management to the programmer
any more than Python or Perl do. 

>Knowing nothing more about this author than I learned by skimming the
>chapter, I suspect it would be a waste of time to discuss Ada with him.  

He's an author and primary editor of the Jargon file, which trashes Ada
pretty badly. I was actually surprised to find it treated this well, which
is why I didn't bother emailing him or posting something to cla about this.

>I guess Ada is not suitable for the sort of programming he cares about:
>
>"In 1996 a widely-reported and plausible estimate of community sizes held
>that for every Python hacker there were five Tcl hackers and twelve Perl
>hackers. "

Sigh. Of all the people, I would expect someone who's done as much 
programming in as many different languages as ESR to recognize that
different languages have different uses. 

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org
Pointless website: http://dvdeug.dhis.org
"I don't care if Bill personally has my name and reads my email and 
laughs at me. In fact, I'd be rather honored." - Joseph_Greg