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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,52fd60a337c05842 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-18 09:35:14 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.vmunix.org!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!news-x2.support.nl!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!uknet!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ada paper critic Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 16:47:37 -0400 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: References: <3D0A399C.EF6F1BD9@acm.org> <3D0B4CCC.7010104@telepath.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1024346858 15198 136.170.200.133 (17 Jun 2002 20:47:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Jun 2002 20:47:38 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26262 Date: 2002-06-17T20:47:38+00:00 List-Id: As an Ada True Believer in good standing and one who has used the language for a long number of years, I can honestly say that I cannot recall ever having decided to change an array reference into a function call, or the other way around. Maybe its just me. Maybe it was the application domains I have worked in. But generally, by the time I got to coding something up, the architecture of the program was pretty well a fixed decision and arrays stayed arrays and functions stayed functions. So maybe I just can't see why its such a big deal that arrays and functions have the same syntax - or for that matter why they should have separate syntax. Maybe in theory its better for Ada to have "A [X]" and "F (X)" syntax. Maybe in theory its worse. But it sure seems like if this is in any way a wart - its a *really* small one. I can't think of any practical circumstances in which it would have ever made the least bit of difference to me had Ada done it differently. Certainly, there have to be bigger issues with Ada than just some superficial syntax like this? MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com "Brian Rogoff" wrote in message news:Pine.BSF.4.40.0206171944480.93931-100000@bpr.best.vwh.net... > > > I am an (ex-)C programmer too, and most part of the time I complain about > > sitting hours before large trees of code and change occourences of a[b] > > into a(i) because a became a function instead of an array. ;-) > > That may be, but any Ada True Believer will chant that in Ada, we don't > give a !@#$ for the writer of programs, we only care about the reader. >