Re: [Ada] made me hate programming

["(see below)" <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk>]

On 01/07/2010 23:00, in article
4c2d0fec$0$6877$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net, "Georg Bauhaus"
<rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de> wrote:

> On 7/1/10 8:54 PM, (see below) wrote:
> 
>>> language profile that disallows overloading.
>> 
>> So you lose Ada.Text_IO and all the arithmetic operators?
> 
> 
> I'd be using a different library.

What about +_*/ ? 

> One use case is when output should
> be as simple as possible. I learned that working with just
> digits seems to be a good way to get started with programming
> in Ada. [...]

I think this is all totally unnecessary.

> Is it possibly good instructions that have made it unlikely
> for students to stumble into advanced features?
> 
> Does good teaching require a good understanding
> - of the independent features of Ada
> - of the independence of features of Ada
> - of how to combine them and when?

In other words: a good knowledge of Ada, and a good understanding of
effective teaching methods? Of course. How could you think that that might
not be the case?
 
> An then, when a teacher has different assorted backgrounds, picking
> up the language of the day because that seems required, has he/she
> got a chance to see all this clearly?  And to form instructions
> accordingly?

You'd have to ask them.

> Mentioning Ada and teaching 16 year olds has quite reliably provoked
> laughter among teachers others and I have met. I can't imagine that
> this laughter is caused by knowledge of how the language can be used
> in teaching.  What about compiler messages then, if these teachers start
> teaching Ada from their own perspective, which may seem plausible to
> them, but not to experienced Ada teachers?

The design of Ada can hardly be held responsible for subjecting students to
incompetent or untrained teachers.

-- 
Bill Findlay
<surname><forename> chez blueyonder.co.uk