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: 103376,81bb2ce65a3240c3 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.211.136 with SMTP id nc8mr4468706pbc.6.1335486380313; Thu, 26 Apr 2012 17:26:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Path: r9ni102448pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.in2p3.fr!in2p3.fr!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!munin.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What would you like in Ada202X? Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 19:26:15 -0500 Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation Message-ID: References: <3637793.35.1335340026327.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynfi5> <87sjfsaw1r.fsf@adaheads.sparre-andersen.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1335486379 4172 69.95.181.76 (27 Apr 2012 00:26:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 00:26:19 +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 V6.00.2900.6157 Date: 2012-04-26T19:26:15-05:00 List-Id: wrote in message news:jnbqqa$tb$2@speranza.aioe.org... > >I can't remember all the details (there is a recording on-line for >>that), but one of his points was (as I understand it) that whatever we >>add to Ada should either simplify it (if that is possible) or be a >>"killer feature" for attracting new people to Ada. > > Adding additions to Ada should be simple. And never repeat that "NEVER" > copied from another language. Such as conditional statements or functions > that look like and act like "C procedure statements." Because people will > say "Ada is trying to become C, and its better to use the real thing, > instead of a copy cat with issues." Huh? "Conditional statements" have been in every programming language since the beginning of time. Perhaps you meant "conditional expressions", a feature present in Algol 60 (which predates C by more than 10 years), and a language which is a direct ancestor of Ada (Algol-60 => Algol-W => Pascal => Ada). I have no clue what a "procedure statement" is; I remember no such thing in C. No matter, "expression functions" were created solely from my own imagination. I doubt they are unique (the need occurs in every programming language for large systems), but I know for a fact that the idea was not based on any feature present in any other programming language. ... > Second altering existing paradigms such as "return-by-reference" to > "return-by-type". which kills existing code and destroys a number of > features in existing codes. And these feature were a plus to Ada. Which > now makes Ada useless for backwards compatibility for programs that > use these features. Good riddence. "return-by-reference" is garbage. We tried to use it in Claw and it is impossible (because you can never define the object to return in any reasonable way. ... > And there are plenty of features in Ada 2012. Most should be plugged > before the final ARG vote. Because a lot of these features are not > worth having if they hurt Ada. The "final ARG vote" happened in early March. Ada 2012 is in the standardization channel now with no further changes planned. Randy. P.S. Yes, everyone, I know I'm feeding the troll. As usual, it's bad to leave these misconceptions around in the permanent record of the Internet...