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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7eaf9f2597de2259 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-15 03:24:20 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!chcgil2-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: on package naming, should the word "_pkg" be part of it? Date: 15 Oct 2001 05:24:01 -0500 Organization: LJK Software Message-ID: References: <9q25ec0248o@drn.newsguy.com> <9q421v0bbg@drn.newsguy.com> <3BCA8730.E660DB5E@mida.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1003141443 21041 192.135.80.34 (15 Oct 2001 10:24:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 10:24:03 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14508 Date: 2001-10-15T05:24:01-05:00 List-Id: In article <3BCA8730.E660DB5E@mida.se>, Mats Karlssohn writes: > Isn't it so, that IF programmers can't adapt to minor syntactical > differences (such as the object.method() vs. method(object) issue or the > BEGIN/END vs. {} issue) THEN they are probably pretty bad programmers > anyway (who probably would have benefited from Ada;s belt and suspenders > approach) ? The technical effect of Ada's fail-safe technical approach applies to certain limited areas where defects are susceptible to mechanical detection. There is a larger effect on the mindset of Ada users, who will use other capabilities of the language (e.g., use of enumeration types rather than integers) to achieve safer programs. The bad programmers who can't learn Ada syntax also can't learn safe programming in general, so I would rather have them _not_ using Ada.