Re: Why not combine Ada and C++?

["Stephen Cole" <s_k_cole@yahoo.com>]

Much as I hate to admit it, you are probably right. Case sensitivity is
dangerous. I just *FEEL* limited by it for some reason. I like the Ada
behaviour of being case insensitive but allowing you to write your source in
any case. So Ada wins again over C++. I am not an obsessive Ada fan (I guess
I like supporting underdogs), but it DOES have a lot of things right.

As for combining C++ with Ada....I still think the idea of maybe providing a
stepping stone between the two would be a good idea. Ada IS loosing
popularity because it SEEMS expensive, clumsy and difficult. Its not! It
just feels a bit cryptic when you start. It just demands what is right! But
Ada is still losing the popularity game!

It is down to PR and FEELINGS. I am convinced of it. Because once you've
learnt it, you find C/C++ very loose and flabby and not tight and efficient.
This issue needs to be addressed otherwise Ada will go the way of Betamax
and all the other good guys in the engineering world.

To sum it up, Ada feels "dictatorial" as a language, whereas C/C++ are
"free". And even if Ada is a "good dictator" it is still a "dictator" and
does not allow looseness which will allow people to feel the language and so
use the language as a way of getting to grips with a problem which needs to
be solved.

After all, a language is *supposed* to be a human to machine interface, and
if it doesn't take into account feelings (which is a natural human trait)
then it is not going to succeed.

Even if feelings are a bad thing to have when programming. We still cart
them with us.

A bit more psycology in program development/design and less logic. We are
human. We may have a HAL9000 (off 2001 the space odyssea) in the end! And
not just clunky windows and WYSIWYGs!

Just dreaming.....

"Stephen Cole" <s_k_cole@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9qeg5r$266$1@trog.dera.gov.uk...
> I think the idea is a good one. I don't like the caselessness of Ada
either.
> It makes feel MSDOSish rather than a modern language. Why is caselessness
> still concidered important in this day and age when memory is so cheap.
Ada
> seems to suffer from rules that seem to be relevant to implementation
> difficulties rather than giving the programmer a consistent/simple view of
> the program implementation space. But I am just a beginner in Ada so maybe
I
> am wrong. But I don't think so.
>
> But there is a lot about Ada to like. I think the combination of Ada & C++
> would be a 80/20 split in favour of Ada. One of the things I DO NOT want
to
> see lost is its extremely strong type checking. Thats beautifully
> implemented.
>
> And popularity is important. If people are being switched off Ada for some
> reason, you have to wonder why! Maybe an Ada2001 is needed which panders
to
> user whims rather than completeness. You get the high integrity bunch
> imposing limitations on the language as it is (like Sparc Ada), so the
need
> for high integrity from the start could be softened.
>
> Just make a language which can be tighted of loosened depending upon user
> needs. Using parsers or maybe even built in pragmas. Thinking about C++ as
a
> Users language and Ada Problem solving complete language could maybe
provide
> a road forward for a language which *seems* to be loosing the popularity
> stakes.
>
> The sooner the problem is recognised (especially by the Ada hard heads)
the
> sooner a future can be built that tries to stem the sloppiness that
> languages like C++ unintentionally may be allowing. If C++ were combined
> with Ada and/or #pragma allowed, just think of the interest the then C++
> hard heads would have in leaning about tightening up their coding skills
to
> produce high integrity software! At the moment Ada (to them) is just out
> there and of no relevance.
>
> At the moment the jump from C++ to Ada is too much to bother with for a
lot
> of people. I was one of them until I was given time and told to learn it.
If
> this gap was bridged more, it would be healthy for everyone I think.
>