Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!csri.toronto.edu!norvell
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
From: norvell@csri.toronto.edu (Theodore Stevens Norvell)
Subject: Re: Learning Ada
Message-ID: <1989Aug31.212510.24304@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Organization: University of Toronto, CSRI
References: <283@castle.ed.ac.uk> <6354@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Date: 1 Sep 89 01:25:10 GMT

In article <6354@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>From article <283@castle.ed.ac.uk>, by db@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Dave Berry):
>> In article <2658@cbnewsc.ATT.COM> nevin1@ihlpb.ATT.COM (nevin.j.liber) writes:
>>>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.
>> 
>> What about having the compiler complain about something obscure or advanced
>> that you won't learn about for ages, just because you made a simple
>> mistake in writing your rpogram 
>
>    Students should have little trouble with this as they write their
>    "rpogram", since Ada has very few reserved words.  It only becomes 
>    a problem in languages like COBOL, whose reserved words number well 
>    over 200... 
>
>
>    Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu

What about having the compiler NOT complain about something obscure or
advanced ...

DO 10 I = 1. 100    Fortran

i = 1,000 ;         C

if( x = 0 )         C 

x := r--q ;         Ada