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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,21960280f1d61e84
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
References: <1169531612.200010.153120@38g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <1169588206.234714.312650@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
 <T7mdnTQ-XfZMFCvYnZ2dnUVZ8tDinZ2d@bt.com>
 <1169624573.534128.172610@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>
 <87sle0sv9o.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
 <j7wt3c1v4p.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <45B761D2.1090509@obry.net>
 <0iy7nsfpic.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <45B795EE.3040700@obry.net>
 <owd55448ct.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <45B7A0ED.3050303@obry.net>
 <7izm88kygo.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de> <45B7B90A.7040401@obry.net>
From: Markus E Leypold
 <development-2006-8ecbb5cc8aREMOVETHIS@ANDTHATm-e-leypold.de>
Organization: N/A
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:31:00 +0100
Message-ID: <p9y7ns6rjf.fsf@hod.lan.m-e-leypold.de>
User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:kvnmZvVJ4agBy+qT/TYOvr8nMuo=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 88.72.216.226
X-Trace: news.arcor-ip.de 1169673984 88.72.216.226 (24 Jan 2007 22:26:24
 +0200)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@arcor-ip.de
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!newsfeed.freenet.de!news.unit0.net!newsfeed.arcor-ip.de!news.arcor-ip.de!not-for-mail
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8567
Date: 2007-01-24T22:31:00+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net> writes:

> Markus E Leypold a �crit :
>
>>  #include <stdio.h> 
>> 
>> is terribly expressive, because it pulls in such a lot of
>
> Certainly not. It does nothing at the semantic level. But I agree that

I can see your point here.

> it is not easy to have a common view about expressiveness, let's drop
> this then.


OK. :-)

Regards -- Markus