mezi zidli a klavesnici

[Ales Prochaska]

Ten článek prokazuje pouze nepochopení toho, co tehdy (a vlastně i
teď) programovacím jazykům chybí. Není to dostatek vyjadřovacích
prostředků (aspoň ne v první řadě), jak mylně autor předpokládá, ale
jejich jednoznačnost a odolnost proti chybám.

Krásně je to vidět na céčku: naprogramovat se v něm dá cokoliv, ale
programátor je zbytečně zatěžován neblahou skutečností, že běžně
používané i zcela raritní obraty mají k sobě syntakticky velmi blízko.

Tohle

> #define TimeCounter 100; //

by se v Adě prostě nestalo :-) Při tom i v Adě se dá zařídit, aby se
výsledek výrazu sice vypočetl, ale nepoužil. Jen na to nestačí jediný
středník.

Ales Prochaska

> On 25.2.2012 20:30, Ales Prochaska wrote:
>> Ne, na vine jsou Kernighan s Ritchiem. Lidi delaji chyby a kvalitni
>> programovaci jazyk je k tomu nesmi navadet :-)

> To ako napriklad ADA?

> ADA bola na smiech uz v roku 1984:

> ... The quest for the Stone is based on the assumption that our "programming
> tools" are too weak. One example is the belief that current programming
> languages lack the "features" we need. PL/I was one of the more 
> spectacular would-be stones produced. I still remember the advertisement
> in Datamation,1968, in which a smiling Susie Mayer announces in full 
> colour that she has solved all her programming problems by switching to
> PL/I. It was only too foreseeable that, a few years later, poor Susie 
> Mayer would smile no longer. Needless to say, the quest went on and in
> due time a next would-be stone was produced in the form of Ada (behind
> the Iron Curtain perceptively referred to as PL/II). Even the most 
> elementary astrology for beginners suffices to predict that Ada will not
> be the last stone of this type.

> Ada will not meet its major objective, viz. that of reducing software 
> costs by standardization, and it will not be the vehicle for programs we
> can rely upon, for it is so complicated that it defies the unambiguous
> definition that is essential for these purposes. Long before the design
> was frozen, computing scientists from all over the world have given 
> plenty of warning but the political body in question preferred to ignore
> these warnings and to decide on a design that cannot be salvaged. From a
> scientific point of view all further attention paid to Ada is a waste of
> effort. But the sheer buying-power of the DoD makes Ada an undeniable 
> reality, which in combination with DARPA's policies for the funding of
> software research can only increase the pressure to spend research 
> effort on the wrong problems.

> (EWD898, 1984)

> -m-