From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: Depending on passing mechanism
Date: 1997/10/22
Date: 1997-10-22T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971022152353.19886C-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: hbaker-2110971640520001@10.0.2.1
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Henry Baker wrote:
> In article <EIDpr3.ut@world.std.com>, bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A
> Duff) wrote:
> > When you gripe about some supposed flaw in Ada, you should make it clear
> > what you're comparing it to -- C? C++? Common Lisp? Some obscure
> > functional language? Some ideal language in your head? -- all of those
> > can be valuable criticisms, but it's helpful to know whether "Ada's
> > limited types suck" is said in relation to a language that even *has* a
> > concept of limited types!
I have no idea why this question was included, since the it isn't answered.
Which language, or process for achieving consensus leads to results that
make everyone happy? I can't get 4 people to agree where to go to dinner
without disappointing someone!
> This is not to take anything away from those who worked on this process.
> In many ways, they were too clever for their own good. Instead of forcing
> certain things to be discarded or fixed, they managed to live with them.
> If one believes that more code will be programmed in the future than in
> the past, this unwillingness to fix old code is penny-wise and pound-foolish,
> because all new code pays for the mistakes of the past.
No, code is like any other man made thing in that compatibility with
previous technology is very important, far more important than some
people think. If you change the underlying language dramatically every
few years the retooling effort overwhelms everyone. Unfortunately, that
means that widely used programming languages accumulate features. It also
means that features like FFIs (foreign function interfaces) outweigh
cool gadgets like unique modes in most applications.
-- Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-10-22 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-10-13 0:00 Depending on passing mechanism Andre Spiegel
1997-10-13 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1997-10-14 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-14 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-14 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Geert Bosch
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-16 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-17 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-18 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-18 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1997-10-19 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
[not found] ` <dewar.877601826@merv>
1997-10-23 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-23 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-23 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-19 0:00 ` Fergus Henderson
1997-10-19 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-20 0:00 ` Fergus Henderson
1997-10-20 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-20 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Geert Bosch
1997-10-18 0:00 ` Fergus Henderson
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-19 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-15 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-17 0:00 ` Andre Spiegel
1997-10-17 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-17 0:00 ` Robert I. Eachus
1997-10-17 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Peter Hermann
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff [this message]
1997-10-15 0:00 ` JP Thornley
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1997-10-22 0:00 ` Simon Wright
1997-10-23 0:00 ` Henry Baker
1997-10-23 0:00 ` Pat Rogers
1997-10-24 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1997-10-23 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1997-10-21 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox