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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.42.64.15 with SMTP id e15mr31338671ici.12.1432589122418; Mon, 25 May 2015 14:25:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.182.20.212 with SMTP id p20mr137778obe.11.1432589122374; Mon, 25 May 2015 14:25:22 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!h15no8414172igd.0!news-out.google.com!kd3ni27707igb.0!nntp.google.com!h15no8414164igd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 14:25:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3e343282-202d-48e0-b8ab-2f427c1d8c3c@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=67.0.18.159; posting-account=lJ3JNwoAAAAQfH3VV9vttJLkThaxtTfC NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.0.18.159 References: <127b004d-2163-477b-9209-49d30d2da5e1@googlegroups.com> <59a4ee45-23fb-4b0e-905c-cc16ce46b5f6@googlegroups.com> <46b2dce1-2a1c-455d-b041-3a9d217e2c3f@googlegroups.com> <3277d769-6503-4c7f-885f-3a730762b620@googlegroups.com> <3e343282-202d-48e0-b8ab-2f427c1d8c3c@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <9d696e68-fcab-4b33-9289-b648be58b37e@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Build language with weak typing, then add scaffolding later to strengthen it? From: Shark8 Injection-Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 21:25:22 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:25991 Date: 2015-05-25T14:25:22-07:00 List-Id: On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 1:54:28 PM UTC-6, jan.de... wrote: > On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 8:44:37 PM UTC+2, Shark8 wrote: > > On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 1:14:56 AM UTC-6, jan.de... wrote: > > >=20 >=20 > And by the way let me say it again: this is _not_ a language shoot out. I= have not got time for such crap. But I would certainly like some light ove= r the issues I raised (And beyond "we need it" and "we always done it this = way", that for me merely points to a vested interest). Oh, no, I didn't mean to come off like it _was_ a language shoot-out. Just = pointing out that the 'baroqueness' (complexity) certainly can have a posit= ive answer to your questions. I am in agreement as to wanting understanding on the size of the RM though.= (I suspect that it derives from equal parts structured format and "we alwa= ys done it this way".) > Shark, the features you bring up are not at all the issue. It is much dee= per than that and I would love a good discussion about it, because to be ho= nest I am totally puzzled by the 1500 pages.there is something deeply wrong= with the thinking behind it. And I am the least of all to say that. Much g= reater brains have before me. No, they aren't -- but they are answers to the question of complexity, whic= h is tangential to the RM's size (it must define the features, and should s= pecify interactions between features like, say, a function returning a task= with an extended return, or an expression function returning an access to = a task). > I love the language, I like working in it, except when the compiler is th= rowing its toys. And dont misunderstand me, it is always for good reasons (= according to the RM, and my logic brain tells me it is right) but the dicho= tomy stays: How is it possible to _not_ have all these issues and work fast= with the _same_ precision and security and provability as what we are used= to in Ada. It boggles the mind. Yes; I think the RM could possibly be shorter... but I think we would lose = much of its topical-structure* if we did that. -- It might have been accept= able to restructure in Ada 95, but the problem of doing it now is it would = be backwards incomparable /w section numbers. * -- The structure makes the TOC and Index very usable. The Ada LRM's index= is one of the better ones, IMO.