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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d5b211b0c1ffcf3e
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.204.132.81 with SMTP id a17mr2137143bkt.4.1339223911893;
        Fri, 08 Jun 2012 23:38:31 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 e27ni30193bkw.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.netfront.net!not-for-mail
From: Jeffrey Carter <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.not.acm.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Practicalities of Ada for app development
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 23:38:27 -0700
Organization: Also freenews.netfront.net; news.tornevall.net
Message-ID: <jqur16$teu$1@adenine.netfront.net>
References: 
 <79c5c9f7-4b72-4990-8961-b3e2db4db79b@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
 <jqtr7u$3r9$1@adenine.netfront.net>
 <f33223ab-5c08-40f5-b0ee-a57862ce72f5@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.20.201.198
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: adenine.netfront.net 1339223911 30174 184.20.201.198 (9 Jun 2012
 06:38:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@netfront.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2012 06:38:31 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
 rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
In-Reply-To: <f33223ab-5c08-40f5-b0ee-a57862ce72f5@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2012-06-08T23:38:27-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 06/08/2012 05:40 PM, Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Friday, June 8, 2012 2:35:55 PM UTC-7, Jeffrey Carter wrote:
>
>> One nice thing about Ada is not needing to use a debugger.
>
> I don't get this comment.  Ada is a lot nicer than some languages at
> preventing you from making certain kinds of mistakes, but no language is able
> to prevent logic errors and certain dumb typos.  And if you make this kind of
> error and the program doesn't work, just the fact of its being written in Ada
> doesn't help you much.  There may less need for a debugger because Ada will
> prevent certain types of errors and things like constraint checks will catch
> some others that would cause havoc in C.  But it can't catch everything, and
> even if it does find an index that's out of range it won't tell you why the
> index was out of range.  I mean, Ada is a much better language than certain
> others for writing correct code, but this seems like a gross overstatement.

I haven't used a debugger for a long time. Usually Ada gives an idea of the kind 
of error and its location, and I can easily figure out what the problem is. In 
the rare case that that isn't true, it's quicker to stick in a few Put_Lines 
than to learn to use the debugger again. This is a self-reinforcing situation, 
of course.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"[I]f we should ever separate, my little plum,
I want to give you one little bit of fatherly advice. ... Never
give a sucker an even break."
Poppy
97

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to news@netfront.net ---