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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ccb707f4c91a5f2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Once again, Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation Date: 1996/10/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 188873672 references: <325D40E0.41C6@hso.link.com> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-10-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Mitch says "To me the Ada is less readable, you have to look up the function's declaration and the parameter's type declaration and think a little bit to know whether the call is dispatching or not. Also the Java notation is more indicative of what is really going on in the program: the function is attached to the object and the function that will be called depends on the object." I really don't know why Mitch is cycling out this old argument, he does not seem to have anything new to say. We have gone around this argument many times, and people feel strongly on both sides. I personally think that the prefix notation is a mess, it is non-uniform, and not surprisingly results in a much more limited semantic capability, since it is too oriented to the idea of single objects and messages, while the Ada model is much more general (note that this is not a matter of opinion, it is a statement of fact, there are things easily done using the Ada notatoin that cannot be done using the prefix notation, and vice-versa is not true!) Which you prefer to look at is certainly a matter of opinion, and you really can't go much further on that than stating your opinion. Indeed previous boring threads on this topic have been little more than statements of opinion. As I say, I am not sure why Mitch is trying to restart this thread ...