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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: why Ada type casting is different from other languages?
 newType(value) vs. (newType)value
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:41:58 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lq1bq1$o5d$1@dont-email.me>
References: <lpsoun$5b0$1@speranza.aioe.org>
 <cbfb8648-9b91-4b02-bfc6-e9389b949f33@googlegroups.com>
 <53c40435$0$6612$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 19:41:58 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="6a11973eeb5096b7267dc5a529e05945";
 logging-data="24749"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
 posting-account="U2FsdGVkX190+MFvOYowAtGTLTjSmNij9Oc30O9a+Pw="
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:54Ai2t4rkEcjrsaRLJmfXSV7iuw=
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:187586
Date: 2014-07-14T19:41:58+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2014-07-14, G.B. <rm-dash-bau-haus@dash.futureapps.de> wrote:
>
> It appears that in some situations style alone is not a permissible
> language design guide. WRT syntax, McIver and Conway explain, with
> novice programmers in mind, that there needs to be a good signal
> to noise ratio and that this may mean just enough syntax, but also
> enough syntax.  In particular, they address "homonyms",
> as in "type(expression)" vs "something-else(expression)".
>
> "Alternatively, it may be better to increase the complex-
>   ity of the syntax in order to reduce homonyms which blur
>   the signal. For example, the meaning of the various compo-
>   nents of the Turing expression^7:
>
>
>     f(C(p).A(I))(N)
>
> "might be better conveyed with the syntax:
>
>     f(C::p->A_{I})[N]
>

To be honest, that suggestion by the authors sounds a bit bogus to me.

By the time a newcomer is far enough along to understand the concepts
behind that syntax, does that person really still need that special
syntax ?

The above is not what you would teach a student new to programming
in their first week of class.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world