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: fac41,f66d11aeda114c52 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,f66d11aeda114c52 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Design By Contract Date: 1997/08/28 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 268802150 References: <3403940F.4154@pseserv3.fw.hac.com> Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-08-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Don says << - Simplicity which enables developers to focus on designing rather than trying to remember language rules. A simplistic macroscopic comparison of Eiffel and Ada based on the number of validity rules suggests that Eiffel is about 50 times simpler than Ada.>> Simplicity is a very slippery term, what do you mean: Simplicity of the description Simplicity of format definition Simplicity of programming applications Simplicity of implementation These are nowhere *near* the same thing. For example, let's compare the floating-point rules in C and Ada. Gosh, C is FAR simpler, look at all those rules in annex G in Ada, not to mention the basic stuff in chapter 3. None of that nonsense in C, C is much simpler. But suppose the task is: write portable numerical codes. Oops, now we are in big trouble in C, and the task is far *more* complex, because now we have no guarantees from the language, and either the task is impossible, or involves all kinds of complex external configuration control. It is helpful whenever you use the word simple or complex to say exactly what domain you are talking about. I see all the time people playing the game where they argue simplicitly in one of these domains, implicitly appealing to people's agreement that simplicity in another domain is crucial.