[TUHS] Re: Minimum Array Sizes in 16 bit C (was Maximum)

[Luther Johnson <luther.johnson@makerlisp.com>]

I think both Ada and VHDL, started formally, and proceeded formally. I
don't have experience with either of them, but from the outside they
appear to be competent and rational.

I was mostly commenting on early C and Lisp (or Verilog is another
example, although I think Verilog has stayed pretty close to the
original versions), of being less formal, with more implicit defaults,
that just do pretty much what you would expect them to, which gives a
great deal of concise leverage. Some of that gets lost when the language
gets more formally "correct" or "complete", or you have to be more
verbose, or maybe just stay away from certain constructs altogether, if
you're not willing to qualify to the nth degree. And so, the later
variants become less useful (to me) than the original versions. It's
true that the first, informal versions of these languages, do require us
to understand, and buy in to, the mindset of the language inventors. But
with the later versions, you have to devour 1000 pages of detail from
the standards committee. Which gets us to working, productive code
faster ? Some prefer one path, some prefer another, but I like to learn
the point of view and approach of the original authors, to me it's like
reading a novel compared to reading an encyclopedia.

On 11/18/2024 09:52 AM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2024-11-18T14:55:55-0000, Anton Shepelev wrote:
>> Yes, big money makes things strive not for excellence but for
>> accessibility and a low, if not negative, entry threshold.
> I think that's an overgeneralization.
>
> The Ada language, for example, drew much wariness and even criticism for
> being funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, probably the most
> profligate spender in the history of mankind,[1] and at the same time
> was condemned for being too hard a language to grasp (too "big") and too
> hard to write a compiler for.
>
> Further, I would argue that Ada was indeed an excellent language,
> certainly for its time and arguably still.  But it was not easy to
> acquire by programmers who took an absolutely slovenly attitude toward
> data type discipline, a characterization that fits many pre-ANSI C
> programmers perfectly.
>
> Perhaps those who learn how to manage data types using C as their first
> language suffer irrevocable brain damage, and are fit subjects for pity
> and mockery.  You won't find _that_ opinion in the Jargon File.
>
> Regards,
> Branden
>
> [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/05/19/997961646/the-pentagon-has-never-passed-an-audit-some-senators-want-to-change-that