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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9e7db243dfa070d7
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!uucp.gnuu.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Do people who use Ada also use ocaml or F#?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: 
 <b17dc7a8-7f8e-46b7-942c-b08ba83ce8fa@j25g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 <gt9eaeq2y4pc$.11t5wghh3e8jh$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <iafhfu$4kh$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
 <1mjd3udlxgzp3$.1abzmwnslu9ym$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <iai8uh$qnl$1@tornado.tornevall.net>
 <1e1y89ly171$.91bu2wu1e2rk$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <iaji7v$kpd$6@news.eternal-september.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:17:19 +0100
Message-ID: <nalh5qpzhp25.4praa0dw8yiw.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 31 Oct 2010 12:17:21 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: e760ebce.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=<<i_nOYOg@A2jYf>V4L0gLic==]BZ:afN4Fo<]lROoRA<`=YMgDjhgBE>BTRb^`4fK[6LHn;2LCVN[<mhadbfdUKBNicY5Ke6GFBbA[lgFc]eK
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:16006
Date: 2010-10-31T12:17:21+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:00:10 +0100, J-P. Rosen wrote:

> Le 31/10/2010 08:38, Dmitry A. Kazakov a �crit :
>> Programming by extension focuses software design on reuse. Yes, it eases
>> writing, just because reuse reduces the amount of code. However it also
>> requires more upfront design, considered bad by some.
>> 
>> As for reading, I completely disagree. There is nothing more unreadable
>> than cut'n'pasted code, which is the only alternative to reuse. 
> Ouch! You just forget reusable components!

Do you mean reusable components unreadable, or, maybe, that these
components are used as-is?

Maybe two-tier "assemble" design works for small throw-away projects, but
in Ada I would rather expect components combined into new components, i.e.
extended, if not functionally, then by aggregation.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de