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: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-27 12:09:32 PST Path: news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: 18k11tm001@sneakemail.com (Russ) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? [although this thread changed to something else a long time ago] Date: 27 Sep 2003 12:09:30 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: References: <3F7024F8.1000102@crs4.it> <3F71A78A.5000701@crs4.it> NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.194.87.148 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1064689771 25536 127.0.0.1 (27 Sep 2003 19:09:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Sep 2003 19:09:31 GMT Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:46 Date: 2003-09-27T19:09:31+00:00 List-Id: "Randy Brukardt" wrote in message news:... > "Pascal Obry" wrote in message > news:uwubvie8a.fsf@wanadoo.fr... > > What about > > > > lwienfowowoenfnowoqnd += 1 > > > > and > > > > lwienfowowoenfnowoqnd := 1 or lwienfowowoenfnowoqnd :+ 1 -- my suggested syntax > > How many chances there is to misread one for another in a real-world > > application ? > > Exactly. An important part of Ada is that its syntax was designed (as much > as possible) to make one character errors generate something illegal. For > most constructs, it takes several characters of change to create something > else legal. This is definitely not true of C-family syntax. And this is the > root of Ada's philosphy, that small changes do not change the meaning of a > program, they simply make it illegal. > > (Yes, Ada does allow arithmetic operators, for the obvious reason that it > would have too weird to say "Add" instead of "+". And it certainly is clear > that you can't get rid of all one character errors, at least as long as you > allow numbers. But that doesn't eliminate the basic point.) Hmmm... that's funny. I see that Ada has :=, /=, >=, and <=, all of which differ by one character. With sloppiness like that, Ada must be driving airplanes into buildings on a regular basis. Then again, there's <=, <<, and <>, not to mention =>. An apparently you disagree with the original design of Ada, which as you concede allows +, -, *, and /. I guess you think it should have used a:=Plus(a,b). I point out, furthermore, that a "one-character" difference is *much* easier to detect in an operator than it is in a complex variable name/reference, which was the point of my message that was quoted in part above. I've seen some weak arguments here, and this one is typical. What is increasingly apparent to me is that Ada veterans are set in their ways, and no amount of reason will budge them on the basic syntax of Ada, even when if is deficient compared to the existing languages that 98% of programmers use. I'm sorry if I'm not showing you enough respect. I am not questioning your intelligence or even your judgment on more complex matters that I would have no clue about, but only on this low-level matter. Everyone has a blind spot somewhere, and I think you have one here. Just so you know a bit about me, I am an aerospace research engineer, and I work at a major government research lab with the leading experts in the world on the future of air traffic management. I try to maintain some level of anonymity on this forum because I am in a position of some influence, though certainly not great power. I think Ada will be indispensible for the increasing level of automation that will be needed in the future. However, I am the *only* one here who thinks that, and I am considered something of a pariah on the subject. Apparently even the FAA is abandoning Ada. I don't want to exaggerate my influence, but I can tell you that I may be literally one of the last hopes for Ada in air traffic control in the US. Scary, eh?