TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 11:06:24 -0600
From: James Squire <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: McDonnell Douglas Aerospace
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (30 lines)
j.m.kamrad.ii wrote:
>
> >What there is instead is an equal and opposite mandate known as
> >anti-mandatism that will flock to C/C++ because these languages are more
> >"fun".
>
> Please explain to me why C/C++ is considered "fun" to use.  I know what is
> fun in software development -- going through software integration and test
> with no major problems.  I have had significantly more "fun" with Ada than
> other languages.  And other empirical evidence also bears this out.  So
> what "fun" am I missing in these languages???

First of all, so have I.  My tongue was sort of in my cheek.

But more to the point, the "fun" I am describing is the "fun" of
unchecked creativity, of reduced keystrokes (readability be damned,
we're having fun aren't we), ... in short the "fun" of being a "real"
programmer - as in "Real Programmers only use FORTRAN (Assembly, Machine
Code, fill in the blank)."
--
James Squire           mailto:m193884 no junk mail
[log in to unmask]
MDA Avionics Tools & Processes
McDonnell Douglas Aerospace              http://www.mdc.com/
Opinions expressed here are my own and NOT my company's
"Would you prefer to be conscious or unconscious during the mating? I
would
 prefer conscious, but I don't know what your...pleasure threshold is."
        -- G'Kar (to Lyta Alexander), "The Gathering"

ATOM RSS1 RSS2