Re: How to make Ada popular. Get rid of ";" at end of statement.

[Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>]

On 19-07-26 13:54 , antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl wrote:
> Ingo M. <announce@amkade.com> wrote:
>> Am Mittwoch, 24. Juli 2019 17:29:06 UTC+2 schrieb Dmitry A.
>> Kazakov:
>>
>>> It is worse than C/C++. It is largely model-driven design with
>>> software written or drawn in the form of diagrams which prevent
>>> even C/C++ rudimentary safety checks. Assorted chunks of code
>>> generated from diagrams are then piled together into one system.
>>
>> If that is usual then it should not matter which language the code
>> generator uses to produce the final result. It would not matter if
>> the object code language is C, or C++, or Ada, or whatever. So, why
>> not use a _safe_ language for that?
>
> IME any restriction in target language tends to complicate
> generator. Ada gives you bundled deal.  Some safety rules make sense
> whatever language you use, but some other are just arbitrary
> complication.  For example, IIRC Ada function can not have output
> parameters.

They can, today. And of course there were ways to get the same effect, 
before.

> So, less restrivtive target language is more convenient
> for generaator.

I would be afraid that generating the less restrictve language could 
hide and mask bugs in the generator.

> Also, macros in target language simplify generator.  Theoretically
> you may think that generator can do expansion.  It can, but in
> practice macros in target language make difference.

Of course there are any number of macro systems that could be used in 
the generator Ada, although Ada has no macro system built in. But again, 
I would be afraid that extensive use of macros in the generated code 
would make it harder to review for generator errors, and could also hide 
inefficient generated code.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .