Re: Build language with weak typing, then add scaffolding later to strengthen it?

[jan.de.kruyf@gmail.com]

On Friday, May 29, 2015 at 12:46:28 AM UTC+2, Randy Brukardt wrote:


> than just ignoring them. Based on my experience, I think a language standard 
> with 17 pages is about 90% hole (unless, of course, the language doesn't 
> actually do anything).

Yes, the 17 pages say that things have been left unsaid, but the compiler stopped any adventures.
Perhaps it was assumed known in those days, at least in Zurich, that you do the job properly or not at all? 

> 
> I'd think it's getting close to time to start over with Ada, not because of 
> any major problem, but simply the accumulation of cruft. The problem is that 
> if you think its hard to convince people to use Ada with all of its track 
> record, try doing that with a new language with no record. So I don't think 
> there would be much of a market for that.
> 
>                         Randy.

Yes . . . and then No.

A telling sign is that Ada has not forked yet. That is either a sign of the great wisdom of the Ada high priests, or it does not evoke dreams . . .

I would say that we could do with a 100 or 200 page "Ada language report" for the kids that have not learned how to read in this modern age.

Otherwise I like to observe that a 'language X' program from the nineties normally does not compile anymore on Gcc. You have to fix the changes in technology first; and please spare me the reasons why, I know about it. But Also in Ada ways of doing things change slowly over time.
So I'd say that we could have a compiler switch if needed once the cruft has been identified (new laguage war. . . )


Two practical observations worth their own thread perhaps:
In the thread about the shortest path through a task Simon came up with some number for interrupt latency in Ravenscar that horrifies me. Surely the object of the exercise of having interrupts at all is defeated by now, At least in my application. (High speed motion control)
--


In the example kernel module in the pegasoft book Ken does the following:

------------------------
-- Kernel Calls

  procedure Printk( s : string );
  pragma import( C, printk, "printk" );
.
.
Printk("Hello,World!" & Character'val(10) & character'val(0));
.
.
-------------------------

This is off course a highly irreligious way of doing things.
So I set out to do it the proper way via Interfaces.C and what,what.

In the end after many lines of converting Ada string to C string, I could only point out to myself that at least I now had unchecked conversions and System.Addresses.

So then, how do I assign a value to these observations, what is the lesson to be applied next time over?

cheers,

j.