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 21:04:21 GMT References: <1991Apr23.190817.28079@Think.COM> Sender: news@Rational.COM Distribution: comp Lines: 24 >I find statement 1 to be analogous to APL, C is somewhere between 1 and 2, >Common Lisp about 2-2.2 (dependeing upon use of some optional features), >and Ada close to 3. Which explains why my Ada example was 1/3 as lengthy as one C example submitted, and 1/2 as lengthy as the other. >The fact that an exercise in writing a >single function requires implementing an entire package seemed excessive. Sigh. You know all that talk about reuse? Slap my wrist, but I just can't help thinking about reuse when I design or code. Tch tch tch. Look--I COULD have written the damned thing in one long function, a la the C example. The only problem is, that would be completely the wrong way to go about doing it if I wanted to write a real routine for use on a real project that emphasizes real reuse. Of course, I wouldn't expect this to be particularly understandable to the hacker mentality, in which the goal, apparently, is to reimplement quicksort as many times as possible before one dies. -- * "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. *