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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d89b08801f2aacae X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-04 09:34:30 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!HSNX.atgi.net!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!bpr.best.vwh.net!bpr Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: Is strong typing worth the cost? In-Reply-To: <3CD2F964.5060802@attbi.com> Message-ID: References: <4519e058.0204290722.2189008@posting.google.com> <3CCE8523.6F2E721C@earthlink.net> <3CCEB246.9090009@worldnet.att.net> <3CCFD76A.A60BB9A8@flash.net> <3CD0A3B8.7B7C8622@san.rr.com> <3CD15FAE.6DEE0AD@despammed.com> <3CD16B60.93078396@san.rr.com> <3CD1B496.DBE8ADC4@san.rr.com> <3CD1BACC.8938FEAB@despammed.com> <3CD1D17B.F60DCB89@san.rr.com> <3CD2F964.5060802@attbi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 16:34:25 +0000 NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.220.65.223 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 1020529884 192.220.65.223 (Sat, 04 May 2002 16:31:24 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 16:31:24 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23544 Date: 2002-05-04T16:34:25+00:00 List-Id: On Fri, 3 May 2002, Ed Falis wrote: > Randy Brukardt wrote: > > I'll grant you that existing Ada environments are poorly suited to XP. > > It's unclear if the language really is, or if it is simply a deficiency > > of the current environments. > > I don't buy either argument. While I haven't done full-up XP, I've > certainly done test-first development a la XP quite effectively, using > AUnit and the capability in Glide for generating its boilerplate code. > I also approximate DbC using pragma Assert. It works well, and is > within the spirit of XP. GNAT is quite fast enough for test-first > flavored development, as you tend not to have a lot of context in unit > tests. I agree with all that. I don't think the X in XP is so extreme that the verbosity of Ada causes your keys to get hot because of all the extra pounding. And GNAT is a very quick, and has excellent error reporting facilities. > Admittedly, refactoring would be easier without manifest typing, but > that's a tradeoff, and tool support is possible. Excellent observation, and well phrased too. Note that Ed says *manifest* typing. It's certainly possible to have languages with strong, static (static = compile time) typing that do some type inference, and this can reduce the refactoring burden. One of the few things I like a lot better in C++ than in Ada is that C++ templates get some implicit instantiation. I'd love it if there was an Ada variant with some kind of implicit instantiation. -- Brian