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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,508516c114ade8e1 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Received: by 10.68.241.37 with SMTP id wf5mr1807124pbc.4.1328807001201; Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:03:21 -0800 (PST) Path: wr5ni5555pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Yannick_Duch=C3=AAne_=28Hibou57?= =?utf-8?Q?=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ada without ada libraries? Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:03:19 +0100 Organization: Ada @ Home Message-ID: References: <82mx8tttx7.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <120f2efrm73fc$.mi1m9kwbbkes$.dlg@40tude.net> <1o71uiwmoiunb.bkjz8c54rcbl.dlg@40tude.net> <4F33F89E.3070207@obry.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: fLpVuVo6AZx9Xe9YP2dkPw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Opera Mail/11.61 (Linux) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Date: 2012-02-09T18:03:19+01:00 List-Id: Le Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:47:26 +0100, Pascal Obry a =C3=A9= crit: > Le 09/02/2012 12:08, Gautier write-only a =C3=A9crit : >> Interesting debate: theoretically, I would support fully Yannick. > > Frankly I'm more thinking alike Dmitry. With something to add? Frankly, I don't see why to have unused stuff = around when what's needed is precisely defined, and why equally focusing= = on operation and construct which are irrelevant for a domain and the one= s = which are relevant. Just think about a calculator which could accept complex formula and = repeat the calculation with different variable assignations (a simple an= d = easy example). You can do it, indeed, in plain Ada and the interface = language may be Ada source compiled or interpreted by an Ada compiler or= = interpreter. Why doing so? isn't it simpler to build an Ada application = = and give it the specially designed interface which is a specific languag= e? Can you please, on this example basis, explain why plain and direct Ada = = would be better? I wonder what kind of use cases each of us are thinking about. Probably = = far away from each others=E2=80=A6 Sorry, I enjoy Ada, but when people assert it's good for every thing, I = = can't buy it, and was still not convinced. Or else, please, give a = concrete example (from the above basis or another). About Dmitry's example of using Ada overloaded operators in place of = Prolog's specific language: what added value? -- = =E2=80=9CSyntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.=E2=80=9D [1] =E2=80=9CStructured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.= =E2=80=9D [1] [1]: Epigrams on Programming =E2=80=94 Alan J. =E2=80=94 P. Yale Univers= ity