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-Thread: 103376,21960280f1d61e84 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news3.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!newscon04.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.net!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr12.news.prodigy.net.POSTED!4988f22a!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <1169531612.200010.153120@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <20070123211651.c0d43695.tero.koskinen@iki.fi> <87zm89tpk7.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4q4pqgmdwo.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <1169719988.972296.121430@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com> <4iauh.1157694$084.1040745@attbi_s22> Subject: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.134.135.166 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr12.news.prodigy.net 1170017008 ST000 70.134.135.166 (Sun, 28 Jan 2007 15:43:28 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 15:43:28 EST Organization: SBC http://yahoo.sbc.com X-UserInfo1: Q[R_PJSCTS@QBTLYYZH@^SXBUSXB@DTMNHWB_EYLJZ]BGIELDVW[AKK[J\]^HVKHG^EWZHBLO^[\NH_AZFWGN^\DHNVMX_DHHX[FSQKBOTS@@BP^]C@RHS_AGDDC[AJM_T[GZNRNZAY]GNCPBDYKOLK^_CZFWPGHZIXW@C[AFKBBQS@E@DAZ]VDFUNTQQ]FN Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 20:43:28 GMT Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8654 Date: 2007-01-28T20:43:28+00:00 List-Id: "Markus E Leypold" wrote in message > > > I'm a bit surprised, actually. I would have thought Pascal simpler to > learn. > It depends on what you want students to learn. At an equivalent level to Pascal, Ada is easier to learn primarily due to its improved consistency of syntax. At the more advanced level, it is more difficult because of the difference in design issues. Ease of learning should not an important factor when considering the adoption of a programming language. Python is amazingly easy to learn. So is Ruby. Both are excellent languages. I like them both. Neither is the right choice for safety-critical embedded systems. C++ is not easy to learn. To do C++ safely is really hard to learn. In this case, it is easier to learn how to safe programming in Ada than in C++. Most of the time C++ and Ada are both taught badly. That can make them hard to learn. The most frequently overlooked dimension of Ada that is misunderstood by those who try to teach it is the scope and visibility rules. Yet that, not strong typing, is at the heart of the design of the language. It is sad that most instructors who try to teach Ada don't understand those rules well enough to show how important they are to being a good Ada programmer/designer. With Ada, once a someone understands Chapter Eight of the ALRM, the rest of the language issues fall into place quite easily. Richard Riehle