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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,beb0b7471c6440e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-22 00:49:34 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!colt.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!news5-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news2-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "chris.danx" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3BFA4095.8325D016@earthlink.net> <3BFA8AE3.48AE4F21@sparc01.ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> <9tfrtg$rkl$1@news.huji.ac.il> Subject: Re: 'Cyclone', a safer C--reinventing the wheel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:32:39 -0000 NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.253.9.236 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news2-win.server.ntlworld.com 1006389127 62.253.9.236 (Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:32:07 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 00:32:07 GMT Organization: ntlworld News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16830 Date: 2001-11-22T00:32:39+00:00 List-Id: "Ehud Lamm" wrote in message news:9tfrtg$rkl$1@news.huji.ac.il... > chris.danx wrote in message > news:RsyK7.1377$6W6.439742@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com... > > > > It was the tone of the post (which I may have taken the wrong way) that > > seemed to convey the "mine's a superior language" belief. I appologise if > > that's not Marc's intention. I make no appologies though, for > highlighting > > my distaste at the recent "trend". > > > > > Chris, > > I think there is no trend. There always were posts of this nature and always > will be, but the majority of discussions here are focused on getting things > done in Ada. That's exactly what they should be about. I agree in part. It's ok to discuss the merits of Ada, but it is not ok to bash a language to glorify (for lack of a better word, you know what I mean) Ada. The New Scientist article *may have been* bit biased but it's one article, the cyclone site doesn't give that impression though (IMO). > In fact, my feeling is that there is a trend of increased interest in doing > useful small scale development in Ada: so many posting are about tool and > libraries (GtkAda, XML, COM support etc.) That is good, and Ada is a good language. That is not what i'm complaining about, it's the *persistant* C bashing (or C decendant bashing) in this group, which rears it's head now and again. I'm no fan of C (for some reason I can't program in it, no matter what I do), but bashing it all the time is pointless. Maybe it makes ppl feel secure, but a closed mind is bad. What happens if a language comes about that has the superior gains (in respect to development time, maintainance costs, program correctness, etc) compared to Ada? (some interesting languages already exist which *may* offer gains, but it's subjective as to what counts as 'better' so I won't mention any of these *interesting* languages, and some folk have probably heard of them anyway). Someone with an open mind would atleast consider looking at such a language. I don't get the sense that this would happen. I'm not suggesting everyone jump ship, just consider that other languages exist and don't slag them off just because they aren't the language you program in. I think the ppl behind Cyclone recognise that there are better ways of doing things, and that it's hard to get these ideas across to ppl. They're trying to get these ideas across to C programmers using what those programmers know already. Don't bash them for it. Goodnight, Chris