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: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!franka.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED.rrsoftware.com!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: How to get Ada to ?cross the chasm??
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 17:15:58 -0500
Organization: JSA Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <pd2gb0$ikg$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
References: 
 <322f9b26-01de-4753-bb50-6ef2f3d993d8@googlegroups.com><87a7th9pd1.fsf@nightsong.com><bbda04b9-0f91-47c5-9193-279b667f503c@googlegroups.com><87h8no1nli.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <pcg2cc$h52$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk><874ljo1hvy.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <pcg6u7$hjr$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk><87vac4z2lh.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <pcimtl$2o5$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk><87lgcszjdn.fsf@nightsong.com>
 <pcvua5$cje$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk><pd11pn$n72$1@dont-email.me>
 <87sh6z1kkg.fsf@nightsong.com><b169fddab8os90eqcnhm6ln2f30belp0ib@4ax.com>
 <87k1sb1dt3.fsf@nightsong.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 22:16:01 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: franka.jacob-sparre.dk;
 posting-host="rrsoftware.com:24.196.82.226";
	logging-data="19088"; mail-complaints-to="news@jacob-sparre.dk"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.7246
Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:52219
Date: 2018-05-10T17:15:58-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Paul Rubin" <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote in message 
news:87k1sb1dt3.fsf@nightsong.com...
...
> That doesn't mean the language's largeness implies doom all by itself.
> C++ is large but it's mainstream.  The issue is whether you have to read
> a 1000 page document to use the language at all, or if it's sufficient
> to start with a subset and expand outward from there.  Most C++ users
> start with a subset, and I suspect not very many know the full language.
> I myself certainly don't.
>
> I would have thought starting with a subset of Ada is also legitimate,
> but if it's not, then Ada is probably doomed.

Starting with a subset is certainly fine. Starting with a subset and then 
assuming that *all* of the capabilities of the language are similar to 
what's in the subset is not so fine. But that appears to be what you're 
doing in these discussions -- you understand a Pascal-like subset of Ada and 
then pretty much ignore all of the other possibilities. If you did that for 
C++, you'd get essentially C; would that be a fair way to look at C++'s 
capabilities??

                                 Randy.