Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!haven.umd.edu!socrates.umd.edu!socrates!rockwell From: rockwell@socrates.umd.edu (Raul Rockwell) Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: Readability of Ada Summary: hit "n" Message-ID: Date: 30 Apr 91 05:26:37 GMT References: Sender: rockwell@socrates.umd.edu (Raul Rockwell) Organization: Traveller Lines: 28 In-Reply-To: jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM's message of 30 Apr 91 02: 36:45 GMT Unattributed: ? >The only measure of readability should be how the program text ? >conveys its purpose to a person reasonably fluent in the language. Jim Showalter: > 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. All languages, then, are unreadable. Including English, including (yeah, I know this is hard to believe) ADA. Ask anyone (excluding people who can already read the language, because that's pointless). > [lots of stuff saying why ADA is more readable than various other > languages because it obviously is] Well folks, I guess it's obvious -- ADA is The One True Way. And this is because of GOOD BUISINESS REASONS. Therefore, if you think otherwise, You Are a Wimp. And it's More Efficient too. (now how do I declare an object to be sarcastic... ((in ADA, of course... ))) Raul Rockwell