Comment by 👽 TKurtBond
Re: "Old Ada books are still worthwhile"
I agree it is a bit verbose, but not to an excessive degree; Cobol, for instance, I find unpleasantly verbose, and Ada is not nearly that bad. 😀 I really appreciate that it goes for clarity rather than extreme terseness. It really does help understandability.
2025-01-10 · 1 year ago
3 Later Comments ↓
🐝 undefined · 2025-01-10 at 05:17:
Yeah I agree. Rationales are cool, you're right. Though to be honest, the way you program was way too different from what I'm used to in c++, so that's why I didn't stick with it. The gnat compiler is weird, too. I have no idea why they didn't just make it work like normal gcc. The compile times are much better though, because of pascal grammar I presume. Also the one thing I've noticed, is that while strict typing can be nice, it really makes refactoring much more painful than in c. Same applies to rust too actually.
🐙 norayr [mod] · 2025-01-10 at 06:56:
gnat compilation times are fast? with all due respect to gnat, that's very slow, compared to fpc (freepascal) or any ETH oberon compiler. (:
🐝 undefined · 2025-01-10 at 08:40:
@norayr no, compared to c++ or any llvm language really
Original Post
Old Ada books are still worthwhile — I had a class on Ada back in college, in the late 80s. The professor didn't really know much about Ada, certainly didn't understand the rationale of the language, so it was a fairly shallow introduction, and didn't really answer the question of WHY someone would pick Ada to use over other languages. So the general impression was of a fairly verbose language with very strict typing. (Note that I live in a very rural area and didn't have access to good...