Re: fyi, very interesting Ada paper OOP vs. Readability

[NatarovVI <4KCheshireCat@gmail.com>]

> the only purpose of any computing is side-effects. (:-))

nope. result is purpose. functional programming just
orders that things. it make result "written" in one place.
this result may be "state of world".
so... side-effects is just "undocumented" results.

in the modern parallel world, functional way better than imperative.
because data flows in parallel program will be clearer and more
deterministic.

>> For example, I use Mathematica, and in Mathematica, there is no data
>> types.  Only expressions. There are transformation rules to transform
>> an expression from one form to another.

this is only Mathematica problem, not FP problem.
you perfectly can have and expressions and types.
And check youself by types. look at Standard ML.

Ada has own goods. but process of their "modernisation" brokes
some of this goods. Gnat monopoly is bad.
Ada no more looks like clock mechanic, where any part is in their place((
Language get overcomplicated, because language developers
is changed. It's too young and have small wisdom yet.
instead of introducing simple predictable generally applicable
mechanic, they add many many corner cases.

is Ada+ML can be simplified to some reliable parallelisable language?
what if they modernise Ada packages in spirit of ML module sublanguage...
and send oop to trash.