Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!im4u!ut-sally!nather
From: nather@ut-sally.UUCP (Ed Nather)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Modern languages (Slight return)
Message-ID: <11671@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: 20 May 88 15:18:55 GMT
References: <3292@enea.se> <2414@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 17

In article <2414@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU>, rwl@uvacs.CS.VIRGINIA.EDU (Ray Lubinsky) writes:
> Hear?  Yeah, I would like to hear how Modula-2 is in any way an improvement
> over C.  Ada you may have a case for [...]

You might want to read Sir Anthony Hoare's critique of Ada (I don't have the
reference at hand, but I still vividly remember its content).  His main
concern was that Ada was so large different programmers would learn different
sub-sets, and would be unable to work on each other's code as a result.  He
felt only the most dedicated of programmers would ever learn all of it.

Has this, in fact, happened?

-- 
Ed Nather
Astronomy Dept, U of Texas @ Austin
{allegra,ihnp4}!{noao,ut-sally}!utastro!nather
nather@astro.AS.UTEXAS.EDU