From: Bob Leif
To: Richard Stuckey et al.
"Strong typing is for people with weak memories"
This explains why a member of the AARP like myself can still program! With
Ada, you do not have to retire from creating source text at the age of 40. I
suspect that the burn-out phenomenon of C etc. programmers is much less or
nonexistent with Ada programmers. A corollary to this is that individuals
with significant domain experience can still program.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Richard Stuckey
> Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 9:46 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Anti-Ada Arguments
> Gene Ouye said:
> > Use of Ada does not preclude use of an iterative, incremental
> lifecycle. On the contrary, I'd claim that it would
> > be easier to use Ada in that kind of lifecycle than C...
> This is indeed borne out by my experience. I find it is easier to
> develop a quick prototype, or do incremental development, in Ada than in
> C, for exactly the same reasons that it is easier to do "waterfall"
> development in Ada: the language prevents me making so many errors!
> For example, imagine you declare an enumeration type for a set of
> alternatives (e.g. user commands, kinds of entity in a data model, etc.)
> which the program has to handle. If you later decide to add some new
> items, and extend the enumeration type accordingly, the Ada compiler
> will inform you of all the places (case statements, record variants,
> etc.) where you must add corresponding new code and declarations. I
> don't think a C/C++ compiler will be as helpful if you add more integers
> to an enum type. If I change the signature of a subprogram, the
> compiler will find all calls that are incorrect - whereas in C I have to
> make sure that my header files are in sync (and use make...), or use
> lint to find the mismatches.
> I find that using Ada, I need to remember far less about the details of
> a program than I do when using C - because the Ada code is closer to my
> abstract mental model, i.e. specification, of the program, and so the
> "gap" in translating from the abstract to the concrete code is smaller.
> "Strong typing is for people with weak memories" - well, the less
> demands the language places upon my fallible human memory, the better!
> Let the computer remember the details - that's what it's for!
> Richard Stuckey