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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b19fa62fdce575f9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 108717,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid108717,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-12-02 01:32:51 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.programming,comp.lang.c++,comp.object Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!sytex!smcl From: smcl@sytex.com (Scott McLoughlin) Subject: Re: Why don't large companies use Ada? Message-ID: Sender: bbs@sytex.com Organization: Sytex Access Ltd. References: <3blinp$8dm@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 07:57:37 GMT Xref: bga.com comp.lang.ada:8168 comp.lang.c:32949 comp.programming:5556 comp.lang.c++:39231 comp.object:9307 Date: 1994-12-02T07:57:37+00:00 List-Id: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes: > > What is for sure is that most students coming out of universities are > woefully unequipped for writing serious, realiable software. THe idea > that knowing how to hack around in C or Basic (or any other language > for that matter) has anything to do with serious software engineering > only goes to show the lack of awareness. I don't think it appropriate to knock on C (or Basic, but bleck ;-). While not the one true language, C has many strengths that I think we can all recognize. It's very flexible,powerful and simple. It's often the first horse out of the gate on new platforms (after an assembler) for many reasons. C allows one to get fairly close to CPU data representations/op codes using standard operators. C seems to be good at generating space efficient programs. Furthermore, I am sure that much "serious software engineering" has been conducted using C as the implementation language. > Sometimes I wonder whether, regardless of the language you intend to use, > you would do better to specifically hire people who do *not* know the > language so that they don't bring a load of misconceptions to the table. > Maybe the best thing is if they don't know any languages at all. The > teaching of programming is often so bad that it has definitely overall > negative value. In my experience, this is not accurate. I don't know what you mean be "misconceptions", but I think all of us know what I mean when I say "style, idiom, convention" - the stuff you can only pick up by banging on some problems with a language, making mistakes, seeing what others have done, etc. A sort of ideal tabula rasa is frequently described here on the net (usually with regard to teaching language X) and I think that this is rather naive. Egads, I don't believe that I'm actually defending C! Look, I sincerely hope that the programming community, economic environment, or whatever it takes changes so that other non-C languages can flourish. While I can write cryptic for() loops in my sleep, I've taken a shine to Lisp and Forth in the past two years or so (neither typed, BTW). I've been reading the Ada, Modula-3 usenet groups and they look interesting. Sather/Eiffel also sound interesting. OTOH, I don't see any budding Phillipe Kahn's of the Ada/ Modula3/Sather/Eiffel world marshalling marketing muscle behind these languages. I don't see anyone out there besting GNU with a free implementation of these languages that will kick gcc's ass in terms of features, debugging, support, ports (Unix,VMS,DOS,Windows,Mac,OS/2...), packaging, RAM consumption, footprint, etc. While some folks _love_ C, many (most?) who have used the language long enough for the "glow" to wear off, don't love it and would appreciate a better tool, thank you very much. But when it comes to shopping around time, there aren't many clear alternatives with a clear future or momentum behind them, or the price isn't right, or imps don't support the box/os you have, or the executable images produced are too large, or whatever. Time for the non-C language X advocates to stand and deliver. To overcome the force of habit, there must be an alternative that is readily percieved as better for the types of programs folks want to write on the platform they need to write them for. ============================================= Scott McLoughlin Conscious Computing =============================================