Re: who needs types? Types makes code ugly.

[Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>]

dirk@orka.cs.kuleuven.be. (Dirk Craeynest) writes:
> To conclude, I repeat below my earlier posting with more information
> on, and pointers to, John's and Jeff's contributions: ...
> I hope this helps.

Yes, thanks, those references are useful for understanding the changes
introduced in Ada 2022.  I had thought the idea of a formal rationale
was different: not just to explain the changes, but also to explain from
an authoritative standpoint why the decisions were made.  I don't know
how important rationales traditionally been in the Ada world.  But, Ada
2012 introduced a much larger set of changes than Ada 2022 did.  So I
can understand if a rationale was more important in 2012 than in 2022.

I guess if higher-end Ada community thought that a 2022 rationale was
necessary, they would have required it and funded it.  As a
not-so-serious user or wannabe user, I don't think I need it, but that's
just me.

I do notice long after reading "Ada Distilled" that most of the
discussions on this group about technical aspects of Ada still baffle
me.  So I think a more advanced online tutorial would do some good.  I
believe the current Ada Wikibook is nice for beginners but doesn't cover
more advanced topics all that well.