Re: Ada

[tyler@procase.UUCP (William B. Tyler)]

In article <8322@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>
>   Regrettably for Mr. Holden, object-oriented Ada is available right
>   now.  Software Productivity Solutions has a product called Classic
>   Ada which serves as a Smalltalk-based object-oriented preprocessor 
>   for Ada-language software developers.  Another object-oriented approach
>   along the lines of Zetalisp's Flavors (InnovAda) will soon be on the 
>   market as well.  But Ted Holden will never let reality interfere with 
>   his point of view, as he has so repeatedly demonstrated. 
>

Wolfe's response serves to reinforce Holden's point.  Ada, the language,
has no capability for object oriented programming.  Use of these 
extensions amounts to use of a different language, especially since 
Ada admits no extensions by definition.

>   Well, Ted, if you aren't bright enough to handle Ada, I suggest that
>   you stay away from it.  

This seems to be an admission that Ada has failed in a very important
area of language design.  If it requires brilliance for proper use,
it is certainly inappropriate as a vehicle for implementing large
projects with many programmers, some at least of whom will be of
average intelligence.

Why don't you give it a rest, Wolfie?  At least try keeping out of
the C newsgroup.
-- 
Bill Tyler				...(tolerant|hpda)!procase!tyler