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: 103376,37f11007c967d5c6 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.66.83.35 with SMTP id n3mr4041478pay.23.1350407901951; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:18:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.233.130 with SMTP id tw2mr3363362pbc.12.1350407901936; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:18:21 -0700 (PDT) Path: jt13ni14511pbb.1!nntp.google.com!kr7no1766635pbb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:18:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <507d6bd1$0$6624$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.126.103.122; posting-account=duW0ogkAAABjRdnxgLGXDfna0Gc6XqmQ NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.126.103.122 References: <507d6bd1$0$6624$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is marketing speak in Ada wikibook o.K.? From: Adam Beneschan Injection-Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:18:21 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-10-16T10:18:21-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, October 16, 2012 7:14:42 AM UTC-7, Georg Bauhaus wrote: > The following two sentences are from the wikibook on Ada Programming > (which seems somewhat prominent). They start the section on generics. >=20 > "The idea of code reusability arises because of the necessity to construc= t > programs on the basis of well established building blocks that can be > combined to form an ampler and complex system. The reusability of code > improves the productivity and the quality of software." >=20 > No offense intended, but do they actually say much at all? > Do they teach generics, specifically? > To me, they sound almost---without wanting to rebuke authors--like > having been dropped from Gautier's CBSG. I don't have a problem with it. Too much "cheerleading" would be embarrass= ing, but this doesn't seem like too much, and it can't hurt to remind progr= ammers to try to write code in a way that parts of it can be reused. I do = have a problem with the word "ampler", though, which is not a word I've eve= r heard or seen used in English--and I'm a native (American) English speake= r, 51 years old. It looked like a typo at first. Even when I figured out = that it wasn't a typo and figured out what the word was, it still was confu= sing. My guess is that this was written by a non-native English speaker, a= nd they just meant "bigger" but perhaps tried to use a thesaurus to come up= with a more interesting word, which doesn't always work if you don't have = a good understanding of the connotations. -- Adam