Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!netcomsv!jls
From: jls@netcom.COM (Jim Showalter)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Functions without side effects (was Old confusion)
Message-ID: <1991Jun24.200336.13199@netcom.COM>
Date: 24 Jun 91 20:03:36 GMT
References: <Re8141w162w@arasta.uucp>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 43

>Really, Jim, it is getting very old.  Your postings are very
>egocentric and a waste of bandwidth. The world knows you love
>Ada. I prefer not to like Ada (having spent three years doing Ada
>related DOD development). And Jim, what you choose to call
>Software Engineering is not the sole domain of Ada.

Deep breath, mind calm...

1) Use your 'n' key, your 'k' key, or, for that matter, your .kill file.

2) I get a lot of positive feedback on my postings, so not everybody
   seems to agree that they are a waste of bandwidth. I TRY to add
   value to these groups. I TRY to post stuff based on real world
   experience on real projects at real companies with real problems.
   I don't see how this is egocentric.

   By the way, what have you contributed as of late, other than
   this flame?

3) The Ada examples are chosen because that is the software engineering
   language with which I am most familiar. The discussion concerned
   the value of formal parameter names, named parameter association,
   and so forth for documenting and resolving ambiguity in overloaded
   procedure names. If I was as facile with Eiffel or Modula-3 as I
   am with Ada, I could just as easily have cited examples in those
   languages, and, in fact, I would encourage those who ARE familiar
   with such languages to chime in. The issue is not Ada vs C--although
   that certainly seems to be the way the argument winds up getting
   cast most of the time--the issue is modern software engineering
   languages and their features vs languages that were invented a long
   time ago by people trying to solve tiny problems in comparison with
   the problems people are trying to solve today.

>using the net for more productive discussion. Thanks.

Please. By all means. Suggest another discussion.

You're welcome.
-- 
*** LIMITLESS SOFTWARE, Inc: Jim Showalter, jls@netcom.com, (408) 243-0630 ****
*Proven solutions to software problems. Consulting and training on all aspects*
*of software development. Management/process/methodology. Architecture/design/*
*reuse. Quality/productivity. Risk reduction. EFFECTIVE OO usage. Ada/C++.    *