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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a6b:9087:: with SMTP id s129-v6mr10407820iod.117.1529596529822; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:55:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5c03:: with SMTP id o3-v6mr478920otk.7.1529596529607; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:55:29 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!u78-v6no2288107itb.0!news-out.google.com!z3-v6ni3050iti.0!nntp.google.com!d7-v6no2247657itj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 08:55:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.195.62; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.195.62 References: <993f28de-6a64-480b-9c6e-d9714bcdef0d@googlegroups.com> <167bec10-2a52-4c79-958d-91faadad915b@googlegroups.com> <2d6a5ab7-812f-47a9-a958-44177a3cf203@googlegroups.com> <4834588f-c891-4a34-a32d-007c91f27399@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ada lacks lighterweight-than-task parallelism From: "Dan'l Miller" Injection-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 15:55:29 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53227 Date: 2018-06-21T08:55:29-07:00 List-Id: On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 9:42:44 AM UTC-5, Shark8 wrote: > On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 3:09:26 AM UTC-6, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > > On 2018-06-21 02:19, Shark8 wrote: > > > On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 7:38:11 AM UTC-6, Dmitry A. Kazakov wr= ote: > > >> On 2018-06-20 15:14, Mehdi Saada wrote: > > >>> So I guess you are in favor with deeper (and de facto) integration = of compilers with static > > >>> analysis tools ? > > >> > > >> Absolutely. Not as tools. SPARK must become an integral part of Ada. > > >> Static analysis and defined provable semantics is major strength of = Ada. > > >> > > > Agreed; this is why I'm pushing for a heavily integrated IDE with my = IDE-proposal. > > > I'd be quite interested to hear your thoughts on the subject. > >=20 > > Why do you think that an IDE is important here? (Not that I will use=20 > > emacs, ever! (:-)) > >=20 > Integration. > I don't mean "IDE" like the industry has come to think of it (editor + bu= tton-to-call-external-tool). / > Think more like R-1000 on steroids, not GPS. >=20 > The integration that you're proposing isn't going to be happening on this= revision of the language, BUT > we can integrate it as closely as possible in the form of an IDE, acting = /as if/ there were a requirement for > such integration. (And indeed, the Ada spec requires a degree of this WRT= static analysis currently, so it > certainly is possible to integrate these things.) In technology, if you name it & define it & then reify it then you own* it,= even if the name existed before with a different definition and/or the def= inition existed before with a different name. There are numerous examples = strewn throughout computer history, of which here are 3: 1) RAII in C++ world is attributed to Boost community, but as much as 7 yea= rs prior it was commonly called =E2=80=9Callocation in only constructors; d= eallocation in only destructors=E2=80=9D but Marshall Kline et. al. did not= reduce the mantra to a catchy acronym or initialism. 2) The term microcomputer was commonplace prior to the release of the IBM P= ersonal Computer in 1981. Nowadays we hardly hear the word microcomputer t= o refer to a PC, other than noting the Micro- of Microsoft refers to microc= omputers. 3) The way of storing compiled Ada objects in R1000 also existed in Multics= for PL/I a decade prior to R1000. Then it was later reprised again a half= -decade later than R1000 for C++ via ObjectStore. * not in the patent or trademark sense, but in the mindshare & fame sense. = Well, on 2nd thought, actually mindshare and marketshare can lend itself w= ell to establishing trademark in legal-world. Shark8, you should pull open the thesaurus and name/define a next-generatio= n replacement term for IDE. Something like holistic development environmen= t (HDE). Indeed, there exists an archaic spelling of holistic that de-emph= asises any misinterpretation of holistic as having anything to do with hole= or holy**: wholistic, emphasizing wholeness. Plus wholistic would have v= ery few collisions on Bing/Google searches. Wholistic development environm= ent (WDE). A wise technology leader once told me: if you need to explain yourself in = embattled debate (e.g., no, =E2=80=A2this=E2=80=A2 IDE, not =E2=80=A2that= =E2=80=A2 IDE), then you have already lost the argument. ** New-age people misinterpret the root-word of holistic as holy, not as wh= ole from before the time that English's spelling was fully settled.