Re: PL/I is a viable language

[robin <robin_v@bigpond.mapson.com>]

Preben Randhol <randhol+news@pvv.org> writes: > Hyman Rosen wrote:
> > Nope. I'm just objecting to "If it broke, and it's C++, it's the
> > language's fault. If it broke, and it's Ada, it's the programmer's
> > fault."
> 
> No, error are always the programmers fault. However some languages like
> Ada makes it much harder to make common simple mistakes (not logical
> mistakes mind you) than other languages whoes design more or less
> encourage these mistakes. This leaves the programmer more time to work
> on reviewing the code to find the complex mistakes. One of the nice
> things with Ada is that you hardly need to use a debugger on smaller
> projects (on big projects I don't know as I don't have experience with
> this). But for C/C++ you sure have to use a debugger at some stage even
> in small projects. Looking for the needle in the haystack takes a long
> time compared to having the compiler tell you both the location of the
> haystack and where the needle is/was last seen.

PL/I tells you where the needle actually is.

> -- 
> Preben Randhol ---------------- http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/ --
> "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent", Isaac Asimov