* RE: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
@ 2000-12-19 18:12 Beard, Frank
2000-12-19 22:53 ` Ronald Cole
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Beard, Frank @ 2000-12-19 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org'
-----Original Message-----
From: Graeme [mailto:bitstorm@bigpond.com]
> Aesthetics (like, wayyyy off topic) - in philosophy, aesthetics
> applies to the mind... in a round-about-way - so though we may
> say that something is beautiful as we perceive it... and attribute
> aesthetic merit to that entity or object... philosophy looks a lot
> into into the relationship between our perceptions and that which
> we believe we perceive... which has pretty well bugger-all to do
> with ada or programming... perhaps.
Finally, someone who grasps what I was trying to say.
> Some mathematicians "know" when a theory (or solution to a theory,
> whatever) is correct by the innate beauty of that aesthetic entity
> they perceive in their mind's eye... I imagine that a (good)
> programmer also knows when their solution is on the right track
> because of some symmetry or harmony to the system under analysis
> or construction... perhaps Ada makes this mental visualisation/
> comprehension a little more intuitive by its architecture ?
So long as it readable ;-) Thanks for expounding.
> Which begs my question:
> "Is a symmetrical (in the sense of harmonious, well-ordered,
> coherent) design also an effective one ?" I don't know...
> I am just a lowly student....
Sounds like you do know. I would hire you.
Frank
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
2000-12-19 18:12 American English (was: Bad coding standards) Beard, Frank
@ 2000-12-19 22:53 ` Ronald Cole
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ronald Cole @ 2000-12-19 22:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Beard, Frank" <beardf@spawar.navy.mil> writes:
> From: Graeme [mailto:bitstorm@bigpond.com]
> > Which begs my question:
> > "Is a symmetrical (in the sense of harmonious, well-ordered,
> > coherent) design also an effective one ?" I don't know...
> > I am just a lowly student....
>
> Sounds like you do know. I would hire you.
It takes a human mind to percieve order in chaos... Value is
inversely proportional to the effort it takes, however. ;)
--
Forte International, P.O. Box 1412, Ridgecrest, CA 93556-1412
Ronald Cole <ronald@forte-intl.com> Phone: (760) 499-9142
President, CEO Fax: (760) 499-9152
My GPG fingerprint: C3AF 4BE9 BEA6 F1C2 B084 4A88 8851 E6C8 69E3 B00B
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: Bad coding standards
@ 2000-12-14 2:32 Beard, Frank
2000-12-14 12:19 ` Robert Dewar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Beard, Frank @ 2000-12-14 2:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org'
I'm not saying coding standards/style guides are just
aesthetics. Listen to me now. I'm saying that "outside"
of coding standards that specify "which constructs to use"
for given situations, you are now in the realm of aesthetics.
I'm saying that:
if success then
runs no differently that
if SUCCESS then
or
IF SUCCESS THEN
It has no structural or runtime impact whatsoever.
If you're talking about something like using a slice
from an array as opposed to a "for loop", then it
can have a structural and runtime impact. On VAX
Ada it was faster to use a "for loop" than to use
a slice because of the way they did range checking
on the elements of the array.
Readability (aesthetics) is a different issue. And
I'm not saying readability is only aesthetics. To
quote my American Heritage Dictionary:
aesthetic - "In accordance with accepted notions of
good taste or style".
I may be taking some liberties with what they mean
by style, but to say something is more readable, to
me usually means it is more aesthetically pleasing.
If it's not readable, it's not aesthetically pleasing.
I don't care how artistic you make it.
Nothing in ARM paragraphs 7-8 contradicts what I said. I
agree with the paragraphs. I agree with the principle of
readability and maintainability, but readability is subject
to interpretation, preference, what is pleasing to read
(dare I say it again - aesthetics), etc.
Our style guide is very similar to the Ada LRM (you say
ARM I say LRM. Which is more readably? Neither, their
both cryptic.). Why don't you type out Ada Reference Manual?
Doesn't ARM violate your style guide? Hmmm, another exception
(ARM renames Ada_Reference_Manual). Why did the Ada95 LRM
style change from the Ada83 LRM style? Hmmm, yet another
exception. Is suddenly the Ada83 LRM style "bad"? Oh,
the poor souls who got trapped under the Ada83 style.
Have they yet to see the salvation of the Ada95 style?
Will Ada0x change yet again? Who's right, who's wrong?
Why doesn't the Ada standard specify the style as well,
so that we're all writing to the same coding standard,
if it is that crucial and people have such poignant
opinions about it?
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Garlington [mailto:Ken.Garlington@computer.org]
:
: Ouch! "Just aesthetics?" See ARM, Introduction, paragraphs 7-8 for a
: contrary position.
:
:
_______________________________________________
comp.lang.ada mailing list
comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
http://ada.eu.org/mailman/listinfo/comp.lang.ada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* RE: Bad coding standards
2000-12-14 2:32 Bad coding standards Beard, Frank
@ 2000-12-14 12:19 ` Robert Dewar
2000-12-14 14:19 ` American English (was: Bad coding standards) John English
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Robert Dewar @ 2000-12-14 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article
<B6A1A9B09E52D31183ED00A0C9E0888C469951@nctswashxchg.
nctswash.navy.mil>,
comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org wrote:
> I'm not saying coding standards/style guides are
> just aesthetics. Listen to me now. I'm saying
> that "outside" of coding standards that specify
> "which constructs to use" for given situations, you
> are now in the realm of aesthetics.
This seems a mistaken attitude to me. Yes you can
argue like Humpty-Dumpty that words mean anything
you want them to mean, but using the word "esthetics"
too easily implies to too many people that it is just
a matter of prettiness and not important.
In considering the entirety of software performance,
aspects which contribute to maintainability are much
more than just a matter of being pretty. For me, an
error in a comment, or a violation of a coding
standard for layout is a bug in the code, and should
be regarded as such.
Warning: non-Ada diversion
P.S. is aesthetics an allowable spelling in American
english? I don't have an American dictionary at hand.
The OED only permits the use of "e" or the ae letter
which I can't even write in this ASCII character set,
but does not permit a separate a and e character.
Of course one could take the position that the use
of ae in this crippled character set is merely a
short hand for the ae character. It is interesting
that daemon spelled with the ae character is a quite
a bit different from demon with an e. There are
positive and negative meanings of the word demon, and
the OED specifically notes that people often use the
a/e form to emphasize the positive meaning of an
agent that intervenes in a positive way (that's the
meaning that Unix tries to catch, rather than the
negative meaning).
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
2000-12-14 12:19 ` Robert Dewar
@ 2000-12-14 14:19 ` John English
2000-12-14 15:07 ` Graeme
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: John English @ 2000-12-14 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
Robert Dewar wrote:
> Warning: non-Ada diversion
>
> P.S. is aesthetics an allowable spelling in American
> english? I don't have an American dictionary at hand.
> The OED only permits the use of "e" or the ae letter
> which I can't even write in this ASCII character set,
> but does not permit a separate a and e character.
"Aesthetic" is, of course, perfectly normal for English English,
but I've got no idea about American English. My copy of Chambers
says this:
"aesthetic: orig. relating to perception by the senses: generally
relating to possessing, or pretending to, a sense of beauty;
artistic or affecting to be artistic."
So I suppose aesthetic is the aesthetic spelling... ;-)
"esthesia, esthesiogen, etc. US spellings of aesthesia, etc."
I trust Chambers implicitly (it's one of the few dictionaries that
includes that wonderful word "taghairm") so if they are happy
with "ae" rather than a ligature, I'm happy too. The OED is a
bit stuffy about these things sometimes.
How do Americans spell "anaesthetic"? Is it "anesthetic" perchance?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
John English | mailto:je@brighton.ac.uk
Senior Lecturer | http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/je
Dept. of Computing | ** NON-PROFIT CD FOR CS STUDENTS **
University of Brighton | -- see http://burks.bton.ac.uk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
2000-12-14 14:19 ` American English (was: Bad coding standards) John English
@ 2000-12-14 15:07 ` Graeme
2000-12-14 15:14 ` Marin David Condic
2000-12-14 17:38 ` Brian Rogoff
2 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Graeme @ 2000-12-14 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
John English wrote:
> Robert Dewar wrote:
> > Warning: non-Ada diversion
> >
> > P.S. is aesthetics an allowable spelling in American
> > english? I don't have an American dictionary at hand.
> > The OED only permits the use of "e" or the ae letter
> > which I can't even write in this ASCII character set,
> > but does not permit a separate a and e character.
>
> "Aesthetic" is, of course, perfectly normal for English English,
> but I've got no idea about American English. My copy of Chambers
> says this:
> "aesthetic: orig. relating to perception by the senses: generally
> relating to possessing, or pretending to, a sense of beauty;
> artistic or affecting to be artistic."
>
> So I suppose aesthetic is the aesthetic spelling... ;-)
>
> "esthesia, esthesiogen, etc. US spellings of aesthesia, etc."
>
> I trust Chambers implicitly (it's one of the few dictionaries that
> includes that wonderful word "taghairm") so if they are happy
> with "ae" rather than a ligature, I'm happy too. The OED is a
> bit stuffy about these things sometimes.
>
> How do Americans spell "anaesthetic"? Is it "anesthetic" perchance?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> John English | mailto:je@brighton.ac.uk
> Senior Lecturer | http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/je
> Dept. of Computing | ** NON-PROFIT CD FOR CS STUDENTS **
> University of Brighton | -- see http://burks.bton.ac.uk
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
Only half-off topic... off this topic anyway, but John - your burks
resource for students
(in the vernacular) rocks... it is very good... excellent... as is your
Ada textbook...
one or two dud links on the burks site though - the motorola emulator
for PC comes to mind
Aesthetics (like, wayyyy off topic) - in philosophy, aesthetics applies
to the mind... in a round-about-way
- so though we may say that something is beautiful as we perceive it...
and attribute
aesthetic merit to that entity or object... philosophy looks a lot into
into the relationship
between our perceptions and that which we believe we perceive... which
has pretty well
bugger-all to do with ada or programming... perhaps. Some
mathematicians "know"
when a theory (or solution to a theory, whatever) is correct by the
innate beauty of
that aesthetic entity they perceive in their mind's eye... I imagine
that a (good) programmer
also knows when their solution is on the right track because of some
symmetry or harmony to the system
under analysis or construction... perhaps Ada makes this mental
visualisation/comprehension a little
more intuitive by its architecture ? As a program under analysis or
construction is itself an object of conscious
(and unconscious ?) apprehension, perhaps you hard-core professionals
intuit your way to the best solutions to a problem
by the most "attractive" possible solution ? Which begs my question:
"Is a symmetrical (in the sense of harmonious,
well-ordered, coherent) design also an effective one ?" I don't
know... I am just a lowly student.... drowning in technical
documentation with no end in sight.
I will be offline for a while... so - no more of my utter irrelevancies
for a while...
but i do enjoy reading the technical discussions... thanks, all... :-)
:-)
G
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
2000-12-14 14:19 ` American English (was: Bad coding standards) John English
2000-12-14 15:07 ` Graeme
@ 2000-12-14 15:14 ` Marin David Condic
2000-12-14 17:38 ` Brian Rogoff
2 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Marin David Condic @ 2000-12-14 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
I just love when the Word Scientists get started! :-) Being something of
an etymologist myself, I often find this interesting. Guess it can't be
helped if you assemble a bunch of Language Lawyers into a room.
Any way to wander this thread back to Ada? Or should it be AEda? (betcha
thought I couldn't do it!)
MDC
John English wrote:
> "Aesthetic" is, of course, perfectly normal for English English,
> but I've got no idea about American English. My copy of Chambers
> says this:
> "aesthetic: orig. relating to perception by the senses: generally
> relating to possessing, or pretending to, a sense of beauty;
> artistic or affecting to be artistic."
>
> So I suppose aesthetic is the aesthetic spelling... ;-)
>
> "esthesia, esthesiogen, etc. US spellings of aesthesia, etc."
>
> I trust Chambers implicitly (it's one of the few dictionaries that
> includes that wonderful word "taghairm") so if they are happy
> with "ae" rather than a ligature, I'm happy too. The OED is a
> bit stuffy about these things sometimes.
>
> How do Americans spell "anaesthetic"? Is it "anesthetic" perchance?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> John English | mailto:je@brighton.ac.uk
> Senior Lecturer | http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/je
> Dept. of Computing | ** NON-PROFIT CD FOR CS STUDENTS **
> University of Brighton | -- see http://burks.bton.ac.uk
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
--
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at: http://www.mcondic.com/
"Giving money and power to Government is like giving whiskey
and car keys to teenage boys."
-- P. J. O'Rourke
======================================================================
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
2000-12-14 14:19 ` American English (was: Bad coding standards) John English
2000-12-14 15:07 ` Graeme
2000-12-14 15:14 ` Marin David Condic
@ 2000-12-14 17:38 ` Brian Rogoff
2000-12-15 16:12 ` John English
2 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Brian Rogoff @ 2000-12-14 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, John English wrote:
> How do Americans spell "anaesthetic"? Is it "anesthetic" perchance?
Yes. Our wonderfully tolerant Merriam-Webster also accepts the UK variants.
Swinging this back to ADA, I have no idea what the American Dental Association
prefers. Next time I need novacaine I'll ask to see the label. :-)
-- Brian
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: American English (was: Bad coding standards)
2000-12-14 17:38 ` Brian Rogoff
@ 2000-12-15 16:12 ` John English
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: John English @ 2000-12-15 16:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
Brian Rogoff wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, John English wrote:
> > How do Americans spell "anaesthetic"? Is it "anesthetic" perchance?
>
> Yes. Our wonderfully tolerant Merriam-Webster also accepts the UK variants.
> Swinging this back to ADA, I have no idea what the American Dental Association
> prefers. Next time I need novacaine I'll ask to see the label. :-)
A nice segue back to a parallel-to-on-topic track... (applause!) ;-)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
John English | mailto:je@brighton.ac.uk
Senior Lecturer | http://www.it.bton.ac.uk/staff/je
Dept. of Computing | ** NON-PROFIT CD FOR CS STUDENTS **
University of Brighton | -- see http://burks.bton.ac.uk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-12-19 22:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-12-19 18:12 American English (was: Bad coding standards) Beard, Frank
2000-12-19 22:53 ` Ronald Cole
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2000-12-14 2:32 Bad coding standards Beard, Frank
2000-12-14 12:19 ` Robert Dewar
2000-12-14 14:19 ` American English (was: Bad coding standards) John English
2000-12-14 15:07 ` Graeme
2000-12-14 15:14 ` Marin David Condic
2000-12-14 17:38 ` Brian Rogoff
2000-12-15 16:12 ` John English
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox