Re: ada without ada libraries?

["Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

Le Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:34:45 +0100, Dmitry A. Kazakov  
<mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a écrit:
> No, the point is not to re-implement LISP, bash, perl, you name it, in  
> Ada.
> The point is to throw it away. The advantage of using Ada is Ada itself.

Such an assertion seems silly to me (with apologize). No language at all,  
not even Ada, could be an universal model for everything. There are place  
for numerous DSL (read Domain Specific Language), and some scripting  
languages, like LISP or derivatives, or logic programming languages, are a  
kind of.

However, as Ada is good at procedural stuff, type and interface safety and  
implementation, this make sense to implement DSL interpreters with Ada (a  
compiler or interpreter for a language X, need not be implemented with X  
itself).

Or else, can you reasonably demonstrate your assertion ?

-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University