"C" is better than Ada because of access to separate subprograms

"C" is better than Ada because of access to separate subprograms

[W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)]

Let's tie up a couple of loose threads and get on to other tasking:

> ... Jon declared that real programs have no nesting anyway, and ...
> [so] all this business about closures is irrelevant nonsense

1. Real programs are written by real programmers    [self-evident]
2. Real programmers program in C                    [ Quitt 1996 ]
3. C does not allow nesting
4. Therefore real programs have no nesting and Jon is vindicated.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)                                Office: 219-429-4923
Magnavox - Mail Stop 10-40                               Home: 219-471-7206
Fort Wayne,  IN   46808              elm (Unix): wwgrol@pseserv3.fw.hac.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: "C" is better than Ada because of access to separate subprograms

[Mark McKinney]

"W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)" <wwgrol@PSESERV3.FW.HAC.COM> wrote:
>
>1. Real programs are written by real programmers    [self-evident]
>2. Real programmers program in C                    [ Quitt 1996 ]
>3. C does not allow nesting
>4. Therefore real programs have no nesting and Jon is vindicated.
>
Wes's attempt at a a proof is faulty.
line 2 introduces the fault.

a counterexample ...
   Even if real programmers program in c the may also program in others 
languages as well. For instance assembly, batch files, lotus 123 or even 
ada. Therfore real programs can be produced in other languages by real 
programmers. This even means that even though real programmers program in 
c it is possible that no real programs are produced in c. At least 
according to the logic you've used. This is interesting because from my 
limited experience average ada programmers often write "better" c than 
average c programmers. better = more reliable, more maintainable, without 
loss of efficiency. 
   If you say real programmers only use c then anyone who has written a 
program in any other language cannot be a real programmer. So that won't 
work either. 

The point is most of us can write good code in any language. I'll choose 
one that best supports clear and accurrate definition of the problem 
space. Ada is clearly better at this than c. Master the solution then 
choose the implementation language. 

Re: "C" is better than Ada because of access to separate subprograms

[Jon S Anthony]

In article <9607121229.AA03818@most> "W. Wesley Groleau (Wes)" <wwgrol@PSESERV3.FW.HAC.COM> writes:

> Let's tie up a couple of loose threads and get on to other tasking:
> 
> > ... Jon declared that real programs have no nesting anyway, and ...
> > [so] all this business about closures is irrelevant nonsense
> 
> 1. Real programs are written by real programmers    [self-evident]
> 2. Real programmers program in C                    [ Quitt 1996 ]
> 3. C does not allow nesting
> 4. Therefore real programs have no nesting and Jon is vindicated.

:-) :-)

But, I did NOT say that closures are irrelevant nonsense.  ROBERT DEWAR
put these words in my mouth.  They are so utterly _STUPID_ that I hope
no one actually believes I really said such RUBBISH.

What I said (and STILL CLAIM) is that all this rubbish about _implementing_
closures with displays AS THE REASON for not accepting them was AND IS
irrelevant RUBBISH.

/Jon
-- 
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
1 Williston Road, Suite 4
Belmont, MA 02178

617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com