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: 103376,6d79efdb8dde2c5a X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!194.134.4.91.MISMATCH!news2.euro.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!not-for-mail From: =?iso-8859-15?Q?Yannick_Duch=EAne_=28Hibou57=29?= Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: SPARK : third example for Roesetta - reviewers welcome Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 00:38:55 +0200 Organization: Ada At Home Message-ID: References: <589eea9a-0b14-4ae5-bf62-9abf4b33e7fb@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <82mxsnuhbq.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <4c69a251$0$2371$4d3efbfe@news.sover.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: k3GxHhLOzON8NRi+WQWeSw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 User-Agent: Opera Mail/10.61 (Win32) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13434 Date: 2010-08-17T00:38:55+02:00 List-Id: Le Mon, 16 Aug 2010 22:40:16 +0200, Peter C. Chapin a = = =E9crit: > In many respects SPARK is not like other languages. Wonder if it is so (look likes a tool then). > The nature of what > it's trying to do is such that these extra supporting files are > sometimes necessary. My feeling is that you should demonstrate > reasonable SPARK style. If it is felt that user rules are appropriate = in > this case, then so be it. If the reader of the Rosetta site is put off= > by the extra complexity, perhaps they would be more interested in the > Python examples. :) That's not only about users of Rosetta which would be supposed not cleve= r = enough to understand it, that's about usability any one else (at least = some ones else). You cannot make the assumption that if someone feel thi= s = is somewhat scattered, then this one is just not versed enough to = understand how good it is. What I wanted to underline is this: 1) Why to present SPARK as an annotated subset of Ada if it is not the w= ay = it is to be used ? (either all these documents about it should be revise= d = or this point reviewed... the latter being unlikely to occur I feel). 2) If the user rule files are of a so big importance (Phil talked about = = tens of thousands of lines of Ada source with a single check annotation)= , = so why to move them at the place where "builded" files belongs ? (just = like if Ada package was to be put in the object/exe build directory). Is= = it the intended location of what is supposed to be a language source ? 3) User rules are written in another other totally different language. S= o = a third unavoidable language comes into the place. This is not tiny affa= ir. Excuse me, but with due respect to you and Phil, I see no way to turn th= is = into anything clear. May be this is an effect of SPARK to few widely used (Ada being sadly = already few than others, that's even more true with SPARK) which may hav= e = turned into the lack of some practical consideration. Sure these points = = are not there to help or to make people feel this is an Ada derived = language with formal capabilities added. Why not promote Windows resourc= e = files as C derived language sources so ? And to present things one way, = = while this is another way, do you feel that is clear or (even honest) ? =AB Je tombe des nues =BB as says a french expression. For the time, unless some news comes in the place, I will end with this = = conclusion: SPARK's not a language, that's Praxis's tool. So why speak = about it as a language, while a language is something which is clearly n= ot = use or managed this way as a tool ? By the way, if this is really a Praxis's tool as I suppose now, do I hav= e = to understand there will be always one single implementation of SPARK an= d = a single provider in this area ? That is important too, and another difference with what a language is, h= ow = it is used and how it lives. P.S. I have not updated the example unlike I said I will do today, becau= se = my mind is totally unclear about the topic now. Just you reply makes me = = think I had to tell my though. If you or Phil want to change it, feel fr= ee = and just do. I probably will not before I will have a back-clear idea of= = all of this. P.P.S Forgive for the hard intonation of my reply, this is just that SPA= RK = is an important topic for me, the kind of thing I was dreaming about for= = long (from the start when I first discovered MS QBasic in Windows 3.1), = so = this trickery does not really make feel at rest.