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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c406e0c4a6eb74ed
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.tele.dk!not-for-mail
Sender: malo@0x53586c1f.boanxx18.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Formal and informal type systems? (Was: ADA Popularity Discussion
 Request)
References: <49dc98cf.0408110556.18ae7df@posting.google.com>
 <cgpma7$pet$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <slrncj0nmf.hl6.adi@ppc201.mipool.uni-jena.de>
 <cgppvn$t4m$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <6F2Yc.848$8d1.621@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <m3isb2ey3w.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <hMnYc.1759$w%6.1486@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <m3656vfgmf.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <e749549b.0409042036.5d4822a2@posting.googlOrganization: LJK Software
 <vpblkhspuA9F@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <e749549b.0409051449.574ec9ce@posting.google.com>
 <m3wtz7e4hd.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <413e2fbd$0$30586$626a14ce@news.free.fr> <wvbrsm9tjg7e.fsf@sun.com>
 <m3n000bv64.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <DjH%c.10540$w%6.8640@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <m3656obc1w.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <plbrfqoln6.fsf_-_@sparre.crs4.it>
From: Mark Lorenzen <mark.lorenzen@ofir.dk>
Date: 28 Sep 2004 11:05:19 +0200
Message-ID: <m3mzza7ohc.fsf@0x53586c1f.boanxx18.adsl-dhcp.tele.dk>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: TDC Totalloesninger
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.88.108.31
X-Trace: 1096362319 dtext02.news.tele.dk 156 83.88.108.31:56457
X-Complaints-To: abuse@post.tele.dk
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4314
Date: 2004-09-28T11:05:19+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Jacob Sparre Andersen <sparre@nbi.dk> writes:

> Jayessay wrote:
> 
> > [Aside: I believe that formal type systems like those of Haskell,
> > OCAML, et.al. are much more potent than the informal ones of Ada,
> > C++, Java, etc.
> 
> In what way is the OCAML (I don't know Haskell) type system formal in
> contrast to that of Ada?  In what way do you consider it more potent.
> And is that good?  (I don't consider C++ templates better than Ada
> generics even though I agree that they are more potent - in dangerous
> ways.)
> 
> Jacob
> -- 
> "You've got to build bypasses!"

Some things I miss in Ada that are available in ML: Higher order
functions, pattern matching and tuples.

Regards,
- Mark Lorenzen