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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2e03bc978c29ea47
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1089ad,2e03bc978c29ea47
X-Google-Attributes: gid1089ad,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: ADA - VHDL
Date: 1996/07/10
Message-ID: <dewar.837036283@schonberg>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 167757603
references: <31E2391F.A16BEBD@sh.bel.alcatel.be>
 <4s09jq$ddn@srvr1.engin.umich.edu>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.vhdl
Date: 1996-07-10T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Paul says

"VHDL has ascending and descending ranges.  Ada has only ascending ranges.
I find it more convenient and understandable to write, e.g.,

        for i in 10 downto 1 loop       -- VHDL

than

        for i in reverse 1 .. 10 loop   -- Ada

Paul
"

Unconvincing -- sure you will always find someone who finds X more
"convenient and understandable" than Y (and of course someone else
who finds Y more "convenient and understandable" than X). I do not
find this a good basis for a gratuitous change like the above (I
would find a change in either direction gratuitious), and indeed
it seems that some of the differences between VHDL and Ada are
not justified, they seem to be cases where personal taste has
intruded unnecessarily.