Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!igor!rutabaga!jls From: jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: Readability of Ada Message-ID: Date: 30 Apr 91 02:36:45 GMT Article-I.D.: rutabaga.jls.672979005 References: Sender: news@Rational.COM Distribution: comp Lines: 37 >The only >measure of readability should be how the program text conveys its >purpose to a person reasonably fluent in the language. Strongly disagree, and you may have struck the heart of the argument. It is pointless to test readability of language by asking people who already CAN read the language (your "reasonably fluent" programmers) to judge readability. There are people who are "reasonably fluent" in FORTH. Does that make FORTH readable? Hardly. Same goes for APL, and other such cryptic "languages" (I put "languages" in quotes because at some point things get so unreadable that comprehension diminishes to the point where it is arguable that communication no longer takes place--at which point it is arguable that language no longer exists). To argue that a person can learn to read just about anything, including Mayan petroglyphs and Egyptian hieroglyphs begs the issue: consider the ramp-up time involved in doing so and then ask if it makes BUSINESS sense to make it so difficult to understand a language. The more time spent deciphering, the less time spent designing and implementing. Seems simple to me. The example I submitted in Ada was deliberately crafted to read as much as possible like English. You can do that in Ada (without expending much effort, I might add). You can NOT do that in many other languages, and the 20:1 ratio of comments to code in one of the C examples submitted is proof of that claim. I have watched C programmers attempt to understand their OWN code--written not more than a few weeks earlier--and fail. This strikes me as rather damning. I can't think of an argument FOR such things--especially not a business argument. -- * "Beyond 100,000 lines of code, you should probably be coding in Ada." * * - P.J. Plauger, Convener and Secretary of the ANSI C Committee * * * * The opinions expressed herein are my own. *