Re: Ada generics

["Alexander E. Kopilovich" <aek@VB1162.spb.edu>]

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

>> the primary purpose of written
>> form of natural language is to provide an adequate storage and long-distance
>> communication tool for a speech.
>> 
>> The form "don't" for "do not" did not emerge as a variation of written English
>> - it just reflects some actual spoken form.
>
>Phonetic writing systems are in a clear contradiction with the objectives
>of "an adequate storage and long-distance communication."

Well, so how about sound recorder systems (from Edison's phonograph to CD)
and about phones (from analog to IP) ? Are all those systems in a clear
contradiction with the objectives of their primary purpose?

> Can you read medieval Russian texts?

Well, I didn't try really - just because I did not meet medieval Russian texts
of any interest for me (I'm not a historian). But I had quite a few occasions
to read excerps from medieval English texts (14-16 centures), and although it
was an unplesant experience (especially annoying was the exchange of meaning
between "u" and "v" in 14th century), it was not really hard work. And given
the distance in time of more than 5 rather dynamic centures, the notation
proved itself good enough, I think.

>> And if the programs should be readable not only by professional programmers,
>> but also by those problem domain experts who aren't programmers themselves
>> then the customs of particular problem domain also influence readability.
>
>No. Programs aren't literature, you know.

Well, it is true that professional application programs aren't a reading for
a layman. But problem domain experts aren't lay people within their problem
domain. They are necessary participants in the developments of serious
applications. They certainly need not to read the application sources in their
entirety (for example, the GUI stuff), but if they are too deprived of reading
essential functional parts of the sources then there either will be a dangerous
gap or the middlemen of uncertain quality.