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,c9d5fc258548b22a 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!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder3.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: How do I write directly to a memory address? Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 20:16:27 -0600 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation Message-ID: References: <67063a5b-f588-45ea-bf22-ca4ba0196ee6@l11g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <737a6396-72bd-4a1e-8895-7d50f287960e@d28g2000yqc.googlegroups.com> <4d5008a5$0$6879$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <4d5031fe$0$6765$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <1f229967-d3cf-42b6-8087-c97ee08652f3@i40g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <4d51169e$0$7657$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <4d51905c$0$19486$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <36212a7b-deab-45d9-ac45-aa29cd90c7bc@o18g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <4d51a7bb$0$19486$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net> <7ee1e395-a885-4f86-a3ed-30f773b67803@y12g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <47adc19e-7623-4d9b-a027-2e35ef64defa@o21g2000prn.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1297390590 32279 69.95.181.76 (11 Feb 2011 02:16:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2011 02:16:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17231 Date: 2011-02-10T20:16:27-06:00 List-Id: "Shark8" wrote in message news:47adc19e-7623-4d9b-a027-2e35ef64defa@o21g2000prn.googlegroups.com... On Feb 9, 7:51 pm, "Randy Brukardt" wrote: ... >> The main thing to redo would be to organize the units and interfaces in >> some >> logical way. We had to work around various arbitrary constraints in the >> early days -- to get the compiler to fit at all on CP/M systems and >> 16-bit >> MS-DOS systems. That's led to a forest of packages with poorly defined >> interfaces (because putting everything related in one package would have >> been too large for what was compilable on MS-DOS). Moreover, people >> always >> "cheat" for expediency -- they directly call supposely internal routines >> because they can. (Ada 83 didn't have anything like private packages; we >> used subunits when we could, but they were only effective for large >> subprograms.) Getting rid of that would be good. Finally, there is a lot >> of >> duplicated algorithms, mainly because we couldn't spare the space to >> store >> little used values. > >I definitely see how that (private packages) could help. This may >be a dumb question but could those duplicated algorithms have >been into a single generic procedures / functions and then >instantiated where needed? Possibly, but it would be better to simply make a single routine that does the job and share it amongst every usage. Sometimes, adding a simple parameter would be enough for that (like "Look_through_private_types"). Of course, that's hard to do with the current arrangement, partially because it isn't obvious where particular things ought to live. Randy. > >Also, in your opinion what's the best thing to do to really understand > >encapsulation and contracts? > > I'm not sure. I didn't really figure it out until I had been burned enough > by bad ones. :-) And we had experience using a "modular" language at the > University of Wisconsin (the original Modula), so we already had a vague > idea of what benefits it could bring. I see.I get the same feeling [vague idea of benefits] when I think how an OS with a mind to strong-typing, that logical organization of units, and a very object (and stream) oriented would be different n-nature than virtually all consumer level OSes. If you're hiring for a rewrite, I'd be especially interested. Actually, I would really love to get in on an Ada shop if possible, so if you are hiring at all I'm interested.