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=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable 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!news2.google.com!proxad.net!freenix!enst.fr!melchior!cuivre.fr.eu.org!melchior.frmug.org!not-for-mail From: "Alexander E. Kopilovich" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ADA Popularity Discussion Request Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:53:52 +0400 (MSD) Organization: Cuivre, Argent, Or Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lovelace.ada-france.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org 1093024432 20163 212.85.156.195 (20 Aug 2004 17:53:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@melchior.cuivre.fr.eu.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2004 17:53:52 +0000 (UTC) To: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org Return-Path: In-Reply-To: ; from Richard Riehle at Wed, 18 Aug 2004 00:30:43 GMT X-Mailer: Mail/@ [v2.44 MSDOS] X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p7 (Debian) at ada-france.org X-BeenThere: comp.lang.ada@ada-france.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Gateway to the comp.lang.ada Usenet newsgroup" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2897 Date: 2004-08-20T21:53:52+04:00 Richard Riehle wrote: > There are a few simple underlying ideas in the language. One > of them is type safety, and that has never been beyond the > comprehension of any programmer. The idea that seems to > have been difficult to grasp, even by many who consider themselves > sophisticated software developers, is the separation of scope > and visibility. Chapter Eight of the ALRM is rarely read by > anyone, it seems. Certainly so. It was said many times (here in c.l.a. and elsewhere) by the most authoritative Ada experts that ALRM is NOT intended for use by regular software developer but it is for Ada experts (mostly by Ada compiler writers). And in many places it is indeed difficult to read - because information is not strictly localised - you can never be sure that there is no important bit of related information somewhere, in some distant place of the ALRM. Actually, a reader of ALRM can't be sure of any broad statement if s/he did not study the ALRM comprehensively - and naturally, almost no one except professional Ada experts can afford that. The idea of type safety is easy because it is an abstract idea, Ada did not invent (or even modify) but just employs it. In other words, this idea is easy for a programmer because it comes not from ALRM, and actually not from Ada -;) . But the separation of visibility and scope, which you mentioned, never was formulated as a clear abstract idea, it is closely associated with Ada - and therefore there is no affordable way to understand it properly as a separate idea. > The benefits of the visibility rules needs to be given emphasis. Those > rules are among the most powerful benefits of Ada, even though > some programmers continue to see them as a nuisance. Then what prevents you (or someone else) from explaining this idea - first in some abstract form and then showing how this abstract idea is employed in Ada language? Alexander Kopilovich aek@vib.usr.pu.ru Saint-Petersburg Russia