Re: POLL: Would you use Ada more if...

[Eric Merritt <cyberlync@yahoo.com>]

> 
> Odd. As an Ada programmer, you should find this
> situation
> pleasing. It's the corporate version of Ada's strong
> type
> checking and syntax. Just as Ada is intended to be
> useful
> for very large projects, and favors the reader over
> the
> writer, the bureaucratic nature of the organization
> is meant
> to support the management of a large number of
> employees. It
> favors ability to manage over employee convenience.

I think you are missing a core concept here. The
strong typing and syntax help me get my job done in a
stable, fast, and timely manner. A bureaucratic and
moribund organization restricts me from getting my job
done in a stable, fast and timely manner. The Ada
typeing an syntax do not exist simply for the purpose
of existing, as I believe many of these bureaucratic
organizations do, they exist to help the programmer.
Now I will admit that some bureaucracy is required to
run an organization but, for some reason, in many
organizations the bureaucracy grows from a support
structure to manage large numbers of employees to a
ravounous beast that sucks the money and life out of
an organization.  

Basically you are saying that becuase Ada constrains
the programmer it is like a bureaucracy that
constrains an employee. I would refute that by saying
there are good constraints and bad constraints. An
example of a good constraint is one that restricts a
person from murdering another person. An example of a
bad constraint is one that restricts a person from
reading or traveling. In this reguard Ada is an
example of good constraints (constraints that are
helpfull and usefull). Bureaucratic organizations are
an example of bad constraints (constraints that are
harmfull and descructive).

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com