Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!igor!rutabaga!jls From: jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: Readability of Ada Message-ID: Date: 24 Apr 91 20:22:04 GMT References: <3878@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> <3892@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.UUCP> Sender: news@Rational.COM Lines: 35 >I maintain that my code was as easy to understand as yours. Period. And I maintain that it is not. Period. But in any event, the real question is--can OTHER people who have only a small amount of programming experience in either language read your example or my example more successfully? ]] 5) You have this stuff about PUBLIC and PRIVATE functions. While I find ]] this confusing enough that I'm not sure I understand it, I BELIEVE what ]] you are doing is inventing some sort of crude form of visibility control. ] Students that have taken my introductory C course understand that ]#define PRIVATE static ]PRIVATE int someFun() ... ]Restricts the scope of someFun() to the file it is in. Duh. I know how macros work. What I'm saying is, I'm not sure I understand the use, purpose, intent, etc of this mechanism. Is it crude visibility control? Okay, fine--then I was right. Is it something else? If so, please elaborate. P.S. You state repeatedly that you're not against Ada and that you wish C had the features Ada has. May I ask why, then, you persist in programming in C? (This is a serious question--I'd like to understand why people would continue to inflict C on themselves when so many better alternatives exist.) Also, check out my neat new .sig: -- * "Beyond 100,000 lines of code, you should probably be coding in Ada." * * - P.G. Plauger, Convener and Secretary of the ANSI C Committee * * * * The opinions expressed herein are my own. *