home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: nnrp.info.ucla.edu!jmartin
- From: jmartin@cs.ucla.edu (Jay Martin)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada
- Date: 16 Mar 1996 02:54:04 GMT
- Organization: University of California, Los Angeles
- Message-ID: <4idagc$ldi@saba.info.ucla.edu>
- References: <00001a73+00002504@msn.com> <4iah20$p7k@saba.info.ucla.edu> <4ica32INN5hn@gambier.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> <4icja9$1r92@saba.info.ucla.edu> <4ictacINN5gk@mayne.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: may.cs.ucla.edu
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0.b3.0 #9 (NOV)
-
- c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) writes:
-
- >>Its stupid to bring in two tools with two more
- >>"languages" to do something trivial that takes a page of normal code.
-
- >Your last sentence is an example of obsolete thinking....
-
- Every tool, language, library, etc, that you use on a project
- increases its complexity and maintanance costs. The people who have
- to maintain or reuse the code must know all the tools and all the
- languages and tools must talk together correctly. Suppose you want to
- do sorting, COBOL is the best for that or logic: PROLOG, calculations:
- FORTRAN, pretty soon you will have problems getting all the pieces
- talking together and anyone to work on it. Thus, the savings gained
- by the tool must offset the pain of using the tool. Forcing expertise
- in yacc parsing for a page of code is not worth it, IMHO.
-
- In a recent case using a yacc parser structure made the code harder to
- use when converting to a GUI interface or trying to reuse parts of it.
-
- Jay
-
-