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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,f51e93dacd9c7fca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-16 11:23:48 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: status of Ada STL?
Date: 16 Jun 2002 11:23:48 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <bebbba07.0206161023.6073fd3a@posting.google.com>
References: <bebbba07.0206132321.23d72ac8@posting.google.com>
 <aedgoc$to7$1@news.iucc.ac.il>
 <bebbba07.0206151051.1c25cf1e@posting.google.com> <uu1o31wbb.fsf@wanadoo.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.194.87.148
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1024251828 6538 127.0.0.1 (16 Jun 2002 18:23:48
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Jun 2002 18:23:48 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26080
Date: 2002-06-16T18:23:48+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Pascal Obry <p.obry@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message news:<uu1o31wbb.fsf@wanadoo.fr>...
> 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) writes:
> 
> > I also happen to think that Ada's awkward syntax is part of the
> > problem. My proposal for a cleaner Ada syntax option can be found at
> > http://RussP.org/Ada.htm
> 
> Of course this is not Ada anymore... Do you think it is a good idea to
> push a new language to have Ada more widely used ?

Yes, it IS still essentially Ada, because you can still use standard
Ada compilers. A simple pre-processor could convert the cleaner
dialect to standard Ada 95, and ANYONE WHO WANTS TO CONTINUE TO USE
STANDARD ADA 95 COULD CONTINUE TO DO SO.

I really don't understand the objection to my proposal. Ada advocates
keep telling me they like Ada's syntax and it doesn't need to be
changed. But the question is not whether CURRENT Ada users like it;
the question is why so few OTHER programmers are showing any interest
in Ada, despite it's superior fundamental design.

When programmers take a first look at a new language, the first thing
they see is the syntax. Ever heard the old expression, "The first
impression is the most important one."? And no, I am not claiming that
my syntax proposal is the entire answer, but I do believe it would be
a modest step in the right direction.