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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,24d7acf9b853aac8 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!138.195.8.3.MISMATCH!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: S-expression I/O in Ada Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 18:39:29 -0500 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Message-ID: References: <547afa6b-731e-475f-a7f2-eaefefb25861@k8g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <1lhdkikeh2sif.bd3pon3knbv8.dlg@40tude.net> <7027f0c6-d909-428c-ab8d-6ba1bd7ff4b2@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <1424bzz54867w.soj1iq72wkwl$.dlg@40tude.net> <9db37b80-acbb-4c9f-a646-34f108f52985@v15g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <16xmnn0qe5yog.ii1p0ap9yuth$.dlg@40tude.net> <5d1d705a-008a-43f1-aa19-9b4878ec926b@m1g2000yqo.googlegroups.com> <7n73yzwym49n$.1f5vg0mbw5jf3$.dlg@40tude.net> <98284e63-8db5-4de1-b3f6-08dff97b6579@z28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1281569971 23489 69.95.181.76 (11 Aug 2010 23:39:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 23:39:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5843 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13148 Date: 2010-08-11T18:39:29-05:00 List-Id: "Natacha Kerensikova" wrote in message news:d1c9014b-c78c-4cb5-ae34-506f8e5702c7@i13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com... ... >> ), then I assure you it can deal with Ada. > >But what's the point of knowing all this when one can't design a three- >digit LOC program properly? >It's just like knowing the dictionary contents by heart without >knowing anything about grammar. I think Bob's point is that most of this discussion is about software engineering and program decomposition. That's orthogonal to the implementation language: your programs would be better in any language, be it C, Ada, Fortran, Pascal, or anything else when you (or anyone) take those concepts into account. But there is no *requirement* to take those concepts into account in order to write Ada code. There is no requirement that you have to separate the creation and writing of atoms. Your code would be better in *any* language if you did, but it isn't always obvious how to accomplish that, and depending on the situation, it might not be worth the mental effort to do it. In any case, you are spending way too much effort trying to figure out how to fit your work into what Dmitry is suggesting. Bob and I have both tried to point out that there are lots of other ways to structure programs over what Dmitry is suggesting. Don't let one person's opinions push you away from Ada!! There are a lot of strong opinions here, and not all of them are the same. There is no one right way to use Ada! Randy Brukardt, Editor, Ada 2005 and Ada 2012 Standards.