Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnewsc!nevin1
From: nevin1@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (nevin.j.liber)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Learning Ada
Message-ID: <2658@cbnewsc.ATT.COM>
Date: 23 Aug 89 23:32:59 GMT
References: <57769@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Reply-To: nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM (nevin.j.liber)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 15

In article <57769@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Golden Richard <grichard@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes:

>With proper planning, there is no reason 
>that an introductory sequence in Ada need overwhelm the student with
>unnecessary details.   Ada's "core" syntax is relatively clean and quite
>easy to teach.

But are the students allowed to *use* more than the core syntax?

There is nothing more annoying than to be able to use only part of a
language because that is all the professor thought was important, and
that is what tends to happen when only a subset of the language is
taught in an introductory course.
-- 
NEVIN ":-)" LIBER  AT&T Bell Laboratories  nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM  (312) 979-4751