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-Thread: a07f3367d7,d5b211b0c1ffcf3e X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.204.143.145 with SMTP id v17mr454796bku.7.1339700460660; Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:01:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Path: e27ni48329bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.alt.net!news.dizum.com!sewer-output!mail2news From: Nomen Nescio Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Practicalities of Ada for app development References: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:07:42 +0200 (CEST) Mail-To-News-Contact: abuse@dizum.com Organization: mail2news@dizum.com Date: 2012-06-12T10:07:42+02:00 List-Id: > The length of time it takes to write a program isn't a valid metric. Of course it is. It's an accurate measure of the expressive power of a language for the task at hand. > Real software not only has to be written, it has to be read and > maintained later, often by someone who is not the person who > originally wrote it. Indeed. > If someone thinks a language is better just because it lets you > write programs faster, I'm not sure that person should be called a > software engineer. I do not accept your idea that expressive power is inversely proportional to maintainability, which is essentially what you're trying to imply. Makes no sense. You can have your cake, and eat it too. Depending on the task and language, there will be cases where implementation can be quick, without detriment to maintainability. By "quick", I don't mean hasty designless code, but simply choosing the right tool for the job.