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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a6b:280d:: with SMTP id o13-v6mr2526448ioo.130.1530796500405; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 06:15:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:75c9:: with SMTP id q192-v6mr1339937oic.3.1530796500174; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 06:15:00 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder4.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!85.12.16.69.MISMATCH!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!u78-v6no2620421itb.0!news-out.google.com!z3-v6ni2690iti.0!nntp.google.com!u78-v6no2620419itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 06:14:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=194.9.244.34; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.9.244.34 References: <856189aa-fa00-4960-929e-174f352310ad@googlegroups.com> <2718c8d4-5f35-4fd8-a1aa-1e60069a7a5d@googlegroups.com> <39fce60c-9f56-42fb-b679-fa08810b00ee@googlegroups.com> <3701bf07-89a5-4cb0-a704-5aebb589ca79@googlegroups.com> <2f5e4ce0-94e8-4b94-9da7-045ec90a9b22@googlegroups.com> <18554067-1382-4b43-a832-2d27aa5117d7@googlegroups.com> <8dc19505-b68a-403c-a164-f1de1864f3f1@googlegroups.com> <559657f8-bbf4-4a70-9449-f85bc98d6c6b@googlegroups.com> <590d4672-4aef-42a5-823c-57ccd291115a@googlegroups.com> <8de6b5ba-25ab-4d46-b80c-1544f43a9b05@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <56180ac1-2480-4df7-9b0c-2e007efa5343@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Teaching C/C++ from Ada perspective? From: Maciej Sobczak Injection-Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2018 13:15:00 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 5029 X-Received-Body-CRC: 3359267191 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53645 Date: 2018-07-05T06:14:59-07:00 List-Id: > I don't see how it could be accomplished in any reasonable way with=20 > header files and preprocessor. Nobody sees how it could be accomplished in the Ada compiler, either. :-) Maybe the whole idea is not very reasonable in the first place? I mean - ma= ybe this is over-engineering that nobody actually asked for, which explains= why we don't have it? Todays' IDEs can figure out and track individual declarations and use that = information for editing aids like code navigation or automated refactoring.= The tech is there (also for C++), but apparently there is no motivation to= use it at the build stage. R1000 might have been an interesting experiment= for exploring the idea, but the fact that no compiler vendor does it today= can indicate that it is not what people consider a problem worth solving. You might argue that it is not possible to do for C++ and I will disagree. = You can point to the small size of AdaCore as a reason for why this is not = done in GNAT, but this argument also loses its strenght if you think about = Goliaths like Apple, Microsoft or Oracle, which also develop compilers. Do = they do this kind of stuff, having essentially unlimited resources? If not,= then why do you think that AdaCore would do that for Ada, even if they had= the money to spend? My guess is that nobody actually needs it. > You describe exactly the scenario how not to do a tool chain. I disagree. I want dumb text files. > Yes. But the correct sentence is: this mess is economically viable=20 > because of other mess. Tools feed on design errors, it is an illness. In the ideal (?) world where you have only one company producing all the to= ols, perhaps the idea of "library" would be viable. But I want open interfa= ces and a dumb text file happens to be a pretty good one. Notice that even in the Ada world the ASIS, which might be a good foundatio= n for semantic-oriented tools, seems to be falling out of fashion. This sho= ws that such constructs cannot be treated as a basis for very long-term pro= jects and large-scale systems are usually long-term as well. That's why I p= refer dumb text files as a stable format that can outlive not only fashions= , but also vendors themselves. Today, R1000 is a history, but dumb text fil= es are still kicking. This is the kind of format stability that we need in = large-scale, long-term projects. > Sure, there is no alternative history. But the argument is good enough=20 > to counter equally fallacious - why GNAT does not do this or that. But it is still only hypothetical. Whereas the problems that *both* C++ and= Ada share in the space of physical code management with actual compilers t= hat are available on the market, are real. --=20 Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com