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: 2002-06-17 22:55:32 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: 17 Jun 2002 22:55:32 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: References: <3D0D18D5.2020601@telepath.com> <4519e058.0206170611.260a3951@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.194.87.148 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1024379732 13977 127.0.0.1 (18 Jun 2002 05:55:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Jun 2002 05:55:32 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26207 Date: 2002-06-18T05:55:32+00:00 List-Id: dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison) wrote in message news:<4519e058.0206170611.260a3951@posting.google.com>... > 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) wrote in message news:... > > Ted Dennison wrote in message news:<3D0D18D5.2020601@telepath.com>... > > > decisions (eg: not using similar looking operators like "==" and "=") > > Take a look at how Python handles the "=" vs. "==" "problem". They > > Perhaps. But that still does not get around the fact that you are > using "=" for something that isn't equality, and a completely made up > operator for something that *is* equality. Why is it not better to use > "=" in its proper mathematical sense? ("because I'm used to that" > isn't a good answer) Think about it this way. Immediately after the statement "x=1" executes, the mathematical statement "x=1" becomes true. The same does not apply to a statement like "x=x+1", of course, but so what? Anyone who is actually confused by something like that should either get over it within one minute or find another profession fast. Besides that, a much more elegant way of writing it would be "x+=1" anyway. And no, I don't say that because it "looks like C". I say that because it is a minimal form (the x need not be repeated, which can be noticibly simpler in a case like, my_very_descriptive_variable += 1 Or do you prefer my_very_descriptive_variable := my_very_descriptive_variable + 1; If so, you're beyond reason. > > And I must say that I am getting tired of people claiming that I want > > to "make Ada look more like C". How does the lack of semicolons > > Actually, you are exactly right here. I'm sorry for misreading your > spec. Please replace every occurance of "C" in my post with "Python". Thanks for recognizing that. In my proposal I specifically referred to Python and Fortran. I did not refer to C or C++, yet I'll bet a dozen or so replies accuse me of wanting to "make Ada look more like C"! How can I help but wonder if these replies are based on something other than rational thought. > > misleading. But I hear it so much that I wonder if some Ada folks > > aren't obsessed with envy over the popularity of C and C++. > > Actually, the point is that we *aren't*. I don't really care how C++ > or C or Python or Oberon represents equality, any more than most of > those folks care how Ada does it. Languages have different syntaxes. > In Ada's case, most of it was quite thourougly thought out and > discussed, and I seriously doubt you have come up with any startlingly > new option that wasn't available to the original Ada designers. But > either way, its just syntax. > > Every year it seems someone comes in here with a great idea to > suddenly make Ada immensley popular by making a dozen minor cosmetic > changes to the syntax so that it matches some other language (that > they happen to be used to). I suspect the *real* goal in such cases is > that said person just got used to the other syntax, and doesn't want > to have to adjust to Ada. So instead of working with the language, > they try to drag the mountain to Mohhamed. > > Anyway, go ahead and drag away. But don't expect any help from folks > who are currently happily using the language as it is. At that rate, a couple dozen regulars on comp.lang.ada will still be proudly using Ada after everyone else has forgotten about it -- like those Japanese soldiers who were discovered still fighting WWII on some remote island in 1967. And they'll still be swearing that its perfectly adequate.