comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen)
Subject: Re: Student views on Ada
Date: 19 Sep 1994 15:29:46 GMT
Date: 1994-09-19T15:29:46+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <35kapa$1fqc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 85B31AAE640@annwfn.com

In article <85B31AAE640@annwfn.com>, merlin@annwfn.com (Fred McCall) writes: 

|>                                                            if the
|> language bashing comment is indeed the true state of affairs, it would
|> appear to me that learning Ada first may have taught this individual
|> some 'bad habits' that have led him to rely on the compiler to check
|> things for him tht he should be aware of himself.  I've seen this happen
|> frequently when Pascal programmers are first learning C.

This line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that one should never use
a spelling checker, or that pilots should not be warned of an approaching
mountainside.  A writer should be aware of correct spelling himself and a
pilot should be aware of approaching mountainsides himself.

Being aware that something is wrong when it is called to one's attention
is one thing; noticing an error--perhaps a clerical error, perhaps an
invalid but seductive line of subtle reasoning--when it's buried in a
large and complex program is something else.

Some C programmers, lacking a language that facilitates strong
consistency checks, may argue that such checks are for sissies--that Real
Programmers do not need them.  However, a compiler that performs strong
consistency checks is, like a spelling checker, an important tool for
protecting us from our imperfections.  Its use should be a part of the
state of the practice for responsible programmers, just as the use of a
safety belt is part of the state of the practice for window washers.  To
call it a bad habit is to deny that humans make errors.

Fools who make NO effort to desk-check their weekly reports to their
managers or the logic of their programs, in the belief that their
spelling checkers and compilers do it all for them, are bound to pay the
price for their laziness one day.  But that's no argument for
discrediting the reliance on tools that make manual error-checking more
efficient and more effective.

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com



  reply	other threads:[~1994-09-19 15:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1994-09-07 14:01 Student views on Ada Prof_Weber-Wulff
1994-09-17 11:46 ` Fred McCall
1994-09-19 15:29   ` Norman H. Cohen [this message]
1994-09-22 15:32     ` Laurent Gasser
1994-09-24 19:04     ` Fred McCall
1994-09-25 17:13     ` Michael Feldman
1994-10-04 11:48       ` Fred McCall
1994-10-05 16:17         ` Norman H. Cohen
1994-09-21  7:52   ` Prof Weber-Wulff
     [not found] <INFO-ADA%94092110295932@VM1.NODAK.EDU>
1994-09-22 14:17 ` Robert Dewar
1994-09-23 10:08   ` Robert I. Eachus
1994-09-23 13:15   ` Norman H. Cohen
1994-09-23 15:13     ` David Weller
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1994-09-23 15:56 CONDIC
1994-09-24  0:52 ` Bob Kitzberger
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox