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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f5d71,7a278735334db126 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,7a278735334db126 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,7a278735334db126 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,7a278735334db126 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-03-04 08:58:13 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!01cc3b7c!not-for-mail Reply-To: "Richard Riehle" From: "Richard Riehle" Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.java,comp.lang.ada References: <4022F87C.BFC600CC@worldnet.att.net> Subject: Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:58:12 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.81.219.173 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1078419492 66.81.219.173 (Thu, 04 Mar 2004 08:58:12 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 08:58:12 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.c++:21968 comp.lang.c:25106 comp.lang.java:3340 comp.lang.ada:6057 Date: 2004-03-04T16:58:12+00:00 List-Id: "Les Cargill" wrote in message news:4022F87C.BFC600CC@worldnet.att.net... > Larry Hazel wrote: . > > 'C' is a right-regular language, with good orthogonality of > operators. That literally means "easy to read" - or at least > having the capacity to be writrten in a fashion that is easy > to read. > Easy to read may not be the same as easy to understand. My criteria is focused more on understandability than simple readability. I am often confronted with mathematical formulations that use a set of symbols, or a combination of symbols, that I can easily read, but which require study and hard work to actually understand. Small C programs are relatively easy to understand. My problem with the language is that understandability does not scale well as program grow. There seems to be a rapid loss of easily accessible meaning in C programs of any serious size. I don't have this same problem with Ada. That is one of the reasons I prefer Ada over C, even over C++, for larger programs. As an Ada program grows, its understandability does not suffer as much as does a corresponding program in C. Dr. Robert Dewar, of NYU, has often made the point that Ada is more readable than writeable. It has so often been my experience that C programmers find it annoying to write := instead of = for assignment. And C programmers miss compound assignment operators. While these features of the language, along with many more, make it easier for some programmers to lay down code quickly, they do not make that code easier to read, even by other C programmers. >From my perspective, the entire C family of languages, with the exception of C#, has suffered, in terms of understandability, from the persistence of original C syntax, and the failure to tidy up understandability has they evolve from the mother tongue. When I am in the classroom, for students who have never seen much of C or Ada, programs written in Ada are almost always easier for them to understand, on first reading, than programs written in any of the C family. Richard Riehle