ADA made me hate programming
in [ADA]
|
From: Colin Paul Gloster on 1 Jul 2010 09:22 On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, anon(a)anon.org alleged: |---------------------------------------------------------------------| |"[..] | | | |APL/B/BCPL -- from late 50s .. late 70s | | replaced with "C" aka newer version. | |C/C++/D -- from 74 .. Now. | | -- "D" is the newest version replaces C and C++ | | "C++" is wide spread in all classes. C/C++ slowly | | replace all other older lang "Cobol" and "Fortran" | | in clasees. | | Also, due to fact that these lang are based on "APL" | | it makes the set, one of the OLDEST lang around. | | This 50+ year lang set should of died a few years ago."| |---------------------------------------------------------------------| APL is not related to any other language which you mentioned. Before APL2 it could not even be programmed with an AZWERTY/ASCII/EBDIC/QWERTY keyboard. |--------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Ada 83 .. 98 -- only taught in gov't sponsor classes. Teacher | | had to be certified in Ada before 98. | | After 98 -- problem is, not enough teachers that know Ada" | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| What was so special about 98? |--------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Languages that are for net and have little to no interest to main | |stream programers that want to deal with the native CPU. | | | |[..]" | |--------------------------------------------------------------------| Web and/or GUI (but not native CPU) programming is mainstream.
From: Colin Paul Gloster on 1 Jul 2010 09:29 On Wed, 30 Jun 2010, Nasser M. Abbasi sent: |------------| |"[..] | | | |Python now ?| | | |[..]" | |------------| Recently the only course language for the Department of Physics (though possibly lectured by the Department of Computer Science) of the University of Coimbra was Python.
From: (see below) on 1 Jul 2010 10:00 On 01/07/2010 14:22, in article alpine.LRH.2.00.1007011416040.12027(a)64bit-RedHat-Enterprise-Linux6beta, "Colin Paul Gloster" <Colin_Paul_Gloster(a)ACM.org> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, anon(a)anon.org alleged: > > |---------------------------------------------------------------------| > |"[..] | > | | > |APL/B/BCPL -- from late 50s .. late 70s | > | replaced with "C" aka newer version. | > |C/C++/D -- from 74 .. Now. | > | -- "D" is the newest version replaces C and C++ | > | "C++" is wide spread in all classes. C/C++ slowly | > | replace all other older lang "Cobol" and "Fortran" | > | in clasees. | > | Also, due to fact that these lang are based on "APL" | > | it makes the set, one of the OLDEST lang around. | > | This 50+ year lang set should of died a few years ago."| > |---------------------------------------------------------------------| > > APL is not related to any other language which you mentioned. As usual, anon is wrong. C is based on BCPL, which is based on CPL (not APL) and CPL is based on ... Algol 60, just like Pascal and (ultimately) Ada. > |--------------------------------------------------------------------| > |"Ada 83 .. 98 -- only taught in gov't sponsor classes. Teacher | > | had to be certified in Ada before 98. More rubbish. My University taught Ada as the foundation language for CS1 and CS2 from 1996. The classes were not "gov't sponsor classes". None of the teachers were " certified ". -- Bill Findlay <surname><forename> chez blueyonder.co.uk
From: anon on 1 Jul 2010 13:11 In <alpine.LRH.2.00.1007011416040.12027(a)64bit-RedHat-Enterprise-Linux6beta>, Colin Paul Gloster <Colin_Paul_Gloster(a)ACM.org> writes: >On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, anon(a)anon.org alleged: > >|---------------------------------------------------------------------| >|"[..] | >| | >|APL/B/BCPL -- from late 50s .. late 70s | >| replaced with "C" aka newer version. | >|C/C++/D -- from 74 .. Now. | >| -- "D" is the newest version replaces C and C++ | >| "C++" is wide spread in all classes. C/C++ slowly | >| replace all other older lang "Cobol" and "Fortran" | >| in clasees. | >| Also, due to fact that these lang are based on "APL" | >| it makes the set, one of the OLDEST lang around. | >| This 50+ year lang set should of died a few years ago."| >|---------------------------------------------------------------------| > >APL is not related to any other language which you mentioned. Before >APL2 it could not even be programmed with an >AZWERTY/ASCII/EBDIC/QWERTY keyboard. Before C/C++ most schools had a class for APL, then B, then BCPL. They did not teach CPL because it was "too large for use in many applications" or used in teaching class, and Algol was limited to large universities. Most local city colleges and small universities never used Algol. Plus: Reference: "The Development of the C Language" by Dennis M. Ritchie As for Algol, Ritchie states: "BCPL, B, and C all fit firmly in the traditional procedural family typified by Fortran and Algol 60." He never states that Algol or Fortran was used to build C. Never trust wiki, especially when it been alter just hours or days before. Use as a unproven work of art. with some programming examples. It better to find at least three other works, such as published work that you can download freely or purchase. > >|--------------------------------------------------------------------| >|"Ada 83 .. 98 -- only taught in gov't sponsor classes. Teacher | >| had to be certified in Ada before 98. | >| After 98 -- problem is, not enough teachers that know Ada" | >|--------------------------------------------------------------------| > >What was so special about 98? For Ada after 98. Officially in Nov 98 the gov't DOD drop direct control of Ada design and support for the US gov't. Congress was not happy! For a school to receive a check from the DOD the prof. had to be certified aka approved by the DOD to teach Ada until Nov 1998. And until 1998 most schools did not teach Ada without that DOD check. NYU use the checks to aid the creation of GPL Ada compiler that we call GNAT. After 98, most Ada programmers were working in the CS field instead of teaching. And the teachers following what the local area companies wanted aka C and Java, instead of Ada. > >|--------------------------------------------------------------------| >|"Languages that are for net and have little to no interest to main | >|stream programers that want to deal with the native CPU. | >| | >|[..]" | >|--------------------------------------------------------------------| > >Web and/or GUI (but not native CPU) programming is mainstream. First, Web designer are like C programmers a dime will get you a dozen. Plus, the next generation web language will use gui imaging and voice instead of html or any other written lang. That what I meant by the gui. As for native CPU, the one area that also use the inernet is game playing. But using Java is too slow and ties up the network with it built-in secuity controls for packages that require a continuous connect. While native CPU programming, is faster and does not require all the secuity that Java uses. But mainstream programming deals with a lot of areas that have nothing to do with the internet. Ada other than the java version has little to do with the web design. Yes, there are Ada programming packages for networking but these packages are not define in the RM yet. Now, controlling a missile, robot, train (full size or model) does not require the internet or any gui. They only require an I/O port or access to memory mapped cell to communicated to the devices and sensors. And algorithms for calculating the weather or environmental impact studies do not require the internet or GUI either. The GUI makes it easier to give a picture or an idea of what going on but not as accuracy as a set of numbers can be.
From: Gautier write-only on 1 Jul 2010 14:07
> Neither do I. It is a puzzling psychological phenomenon. Only professional > mathematicians can compete them. Ahem. It sounds like an invitation to answer. Are you good at fencing ? OK, just kidding, eh ? Anyway. I beg to disagree: you forgot the physicists. *They* a lot better, if not the best, in this area, by far. > I have several books on numeric methods > and statistics with source code attached, usually in FORTRAN. It is > horrifying. Many scientific papers I had time to time to review contained > code samples. I guess they were intended to illustrate some point, > unfortunately absolutely in vain, because even Champollion were he still > alive, would be unable to decipher these. (:-)) You guessed wrong: the goal is to discourage people trying the code and seeing that it doesn't work at all, except eventually with the specific data provided to illustrate the point. G. |