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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4c8d:: with SMTP id j13mr6894260qtv.38.1590723947218; Thu, 28 May 2020 20:45:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a4a:b607:: with SMTP id z7mr4902036oon.71.1590723946935; Thu, 28 May 2020 20:45:46 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 20:45:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <50711230-5b14-4278-b9d8-d197bbe3c93b@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.215.60; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.215.60 References: <50711230-5b14-4278-b9d8-d197bbe3c93b@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ada++ From: Optikos Injection-Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 03:45:47 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:58815 Date: 2020-05-28T20:45:46-07:00 List-Id: On Thursday, May 28, 2020 at 5:33:15 PM UTC-5, Jerry wrote: > Ada++. YABL? Please discuss. > http://www.adapplang.com/ Please forgive me for being from another planet, but for what does the B of= YABL stand? Yet Another ________ Language botched? fatherless-son -ized? Quite honestly, I think it is a YAAL: yet another Algol language like so m= any others because its roadmap so far seems to focus on yet another syntax = for the same old stuff that we all have been regurgitating slightly differe= ntly since Algol60. In mild support of their efforts, I would suggest that the Ada++ team go di= gging deep into old SIGADA and Tri-Ada academic papers at dl.acm.org (which= are nearly all available at no-charge until 30 June 2020 due to Covid-19).= There are multiple old critiques and could-have would-have should-have al= ternative viewpoints of alternate Ada language variants that were passed ov= er, including some variants that would have achieved another Steelman requi= rement or two that Ada chose not to do and that the Air Force's reviews tri= mmed out of Ichbiah's original more-expansive vision for Ada. The article = below is the biggest inventory of alternate variants of Ada that were disca= rded as proposed Green morphed into mil-standard Ada post-Steelman (and qui= te honestly before that and after that in this exhaustive inventory). Plus= the Ada++ team should search for the great multitude of mentionings here o= n c.l.a of what a next-gen Ada would fix in rusty musty crusty older parts = of Ada that are less admired nowadays than Ichbiah & HOLWG considered cruci= al back in the 1970s. Hint: more radical semantic maturations than mere s= yntactic doo-dads here & there. For example, greater amounts of orthogonal= ity such as constant members of records as required in Steelman 3-3F. As a= nother example, resurrection of the old a.app Ada-interpreter-within-the-Ad= a-compiler that was in DEC/Sun Ada compilers (which itself was Ada's rethin= k of PL/I's #PL/I interpreter within PL/I compiler), then drastically exten= ding a.app's capabilities for multistage programming beyond OCaml-P4's. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/989791.989792