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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.236.7.133 with SMTP id 5mr27190149yhp.3.1432538095615; Mon, 25 May 2015 00:14:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.48.11 with SMTP id n11mr246244qga.35.1432538095577; Mon, 25 May 2015 00:14:55 -0700 (PDT) Path: buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!z60no3662268qgd.1!news-out.google.com!4ni44qgh.1!nntp.google.com!z60no3663454qgd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 00:14:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=105.237.110.115; posting-account=orbgeAkAAADzWCTlruxuX_Ts4lIq8C5J NNTP-Posting-Host: 105.237.110.115 References: <127b004d-2163-477b-9209-49d30d2da5e1@googlegroups.com> <59a4ee45-23fb-4b0e-905c-cc16ce46b5f6@googlegroups.com> <46b2dce1-2a1c-455d-b041-3a9d217e2c3f@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Build language with weak typing, then add scaffolding later to strengthen it? From: jan.de.kruyf@gmail.com Injection-Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 07:14:55 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:193287 Date: 2015-05-25T00:14:55-07:00 List-Id: On Saturday, May 23, 2015 at 2:40:25 PM UTC+2, Georg Bauhaus wrote: >=20 > People who write C scarcely know what they really are writing.=20 That sir is a rather shallow statement to make. I would rather say they are= experts in that they can produce so much good code with such an oldfashion= ed language. > (If cheaper Ada could help, than I think that remembering DOT.COM > business will prevent a situation that makes Ada have C-like pricing > for microcontrollers.) > Wel, just of my head: there is Ada for avr and for ARM Cortex. Both free of= charge, waiting for you to make a good runtime for the processor you want = to use. >=20 > What corresponds to the Oberon-1 "manual" (Wirth's 1987 report, > I take it?) in Ada's ISO reference would be the core language. > About 1/3 of the LRM, some 350 pages. George your Oberon commentary is way off the mark. And your argumentation i= s weak, but I dont need to elaborate on that, since this is not a language = shoot out. I merely used it as an example to prove a point. And statistics prove that point. I have written 1000th's of lines in Oberon= and 1000th's of lines in Ada. Both highly technical software. And I got exactly the same kind of errors on compiling and running: errors = caused by my sloppy habits. And both the Oberon compiler that fits on a flo= ppy (a floppy, not a stiffy) and Gcc which stands at over 1Gig of source in= the latest implementation, caught them equally well and also the runtime e= rrors that I caused were exactly the same. And otherwise: the precision was= exquisite. Oberon has a long and proud history of making things smaller an= d more precise. While experience teaches that Ada tries to make things more= precise, but causes bloat in the process. So please explain to me why on earth I or DoD or ISO or anybody else needs = all the bloat to confuse us.=20 1. Does a program become easier to prove formally when the language has mor= e baroque features? 2. Does it become easier to write when the language has more baroque featur= es? 3. Does the program production process become faster when the language used= has more baroque features? 4. Does the program become easier to maintain when the language has more ba= roque features? 5. Do we attract more programmers to a language that is clearly over-specif= ied and difficult to learn? And the group on this list is getting frightful= ly small and is getting on in years! 6. Do we convince more managers to use a language of which the essence is d= ifficult to grasp at first sight? You may answer, I rest my case. Cheers, j.