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=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,91c7c63c23ef2d0c,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: gwinn@res.ray.com (Joe Gwinn) Subject: Re: Beware: Rep spec on an enumeration type ... Date: 1997/12/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 297420398 Organization: Raytheon Electronic Systems Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-12-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Green Hills informs me that unnamed Ada vendors have been misusing my 5 December 1997 posting "Beware: Rep spec on an enumeration type causes code explosion" (on newsgroup "comp.lang.ada") to gain unfair competitive advantage, in effect claiming that my posting proves that the Green Hills Ada95 compiler is relatively immature, that only Green Hills has such problems, etc. I very much disagree with this interpretation. My interpretation follows. All this talk of "maturity" in compilers for a very complex language finalized only two years ago, in 1995, strikes me as painfully naive. All living compilers are works in progress. They all have their strong points and weak points, some common to all compilers, and some particular to one or another compiler, and all will have their fair share of pratfalls. This is true of C++ and Ada95, which are of roughly equal complexity. It's misleading to say or imply otherwise. So, if a vendor foolishly claims such perfection, laugh, and ask to see his buglist. Yes, he does most certainly does have one. It may prove difficult to get a copy. Also ask for the names and phone numbers of ten happy users of the compiler, call them up, and ask them how just how happy they are. If no such list is forthcoming, find another vendor. We are judged by the work of our hands. More to the point, my complaint here is with the entire Ada community, and not with this or that specific vendor or compiler. What's needed is an efficient way for mere customers to gracefully avoid the inevitable pratfalls, rather than to be forced find them in the dark one by one, with their shins. Expensive, painful, and embarassing. There is a rule of thumb in retail that every satisfied customer tells perhaps two people, while every dissatisfied customer tells at least ten people. Every horror story shrinks the Ada market. It does nobody any good to allow Ada's reputation to be damaged by allowing one Ada customer after another to blunder into such well-known beartraps. Most customers are domain experts, not language experts. Telling them after the fact that they should have known better just makes them angrier and angrier, and drives them away. Tucker Taft's posting of 9 December 1997, which gave a number of areas to look into, is just the kind of pointed information that is needed, and can form the start of an Ada95 FAQ. What other areas are known? Let's pull a FAQ together, starting now. Please email me a copy of all relevant postings. Joe Gwinn