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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,243dc2fb696a49cd X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!peer01.cox.net!cox.net!peer-uk.news.demon.net!kibo.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!not-for-mail From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Popularity: Comparison of Ada/Charles with C++ STL (and Perl) Date: 22 Sep 2004 22:24:44 +0100 Organization: Pushface Sender: simon@smaug.pushface.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: pogner.demon.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1095888645 23632 62.49.19.209 (22 Sep 2004 21:30:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:30:45 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3966 Date: 2004-09-22T22:24:44+01:00 List-Id: James Alan Farrell writes: > The things that make a language a "good" language are many and > complex, and are different in different circumstances. If I need a > small utility that compares lines in different text files, I find > perl much easier than Ada. On the other hand, if I have a very > large project that must always perform "correctly", I've not found a > language that can beat Ada. Even I would accept that Ada may just not be the best language in the world for text processing! We needed a program to remove the private part of a package spec; the winner was the one-line sed script you can select off the Wiki and paste into an xterm. And there's the Ada line counter (which includes semicolons in comments and strings but is still useful): $ tr -cd ';'