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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,eb664162efb14c78 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-12-20 15:55:36 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!news1.optus.net.au!optus!spool01.syd.optusnet.com.au!spool.optusnet.com.au!not-for-mail From: faust Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Why would it take so long to write an Ada compiler? Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 10:54:04 -0800 Organization: Cthulhu Fthagn Reply-To: The Elder Gods Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.49.81.163 X-Trace: 1040428411 25755 210.49.81.163 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32130 Date: 2002-12-21T10:54:04-08:00 List-Id: Mike , emitted these fragments: > >Hello, > >I've read somewhere that to make an Ada95 compliant compiler, 50 years-man of >work are generally considered what is necessary. > >How is this huge quantity of development time justified? Perhaps required for >the standard library? Read Hoare's Turing Award lecture, "The Emperor's new clothes". He argues that it is because of the ad hoc way and unprincipled way features were added onto what finally became Ada. -------------------------------------------------------- Come see, real flowers of this pain-filled world. (from Basho)