Content deleted Content added
m {{talkheader}} |
new section: suggested article improvements |
||
Line 162:
: I just wanted to start writing such a chapter but the first sentence in chapter "[[Ada_programming_language#Features|Features]]" allready reads: "Ada was originally targeted at '''embedded''' and real-time systems, and is still commonly used for those purposes.". --[[User:Krischik|Krischik]] 18:19, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
== Article improvements ==
:''"It addresses many of the same tasks as C or C++, but with one of the best type-safety systems available in a statically typed programming language."''
This sounds rather dubious to me. No cites, no specifics, simply an assertion. What sort of a type system? Strong, weak, optional type declarations or mandatory, duck-typing; any sort of type inference? For that matter, are there higher-order functions or any functional characteristics at all?
Why is the Ariane 5 section a top level section? That should really be a subheader of a (currently non-existent) Criticism section (I think a criticism section is definitely missing- the first time I ever heard of Ada was when some folks were criticising it). It's also kinda weasel-wordy. While we are talking about the headers, why the deuce is there an "Ada Wikis" section? That should be a subheader of External links, as none of them are notable enough to have their own article- and that's just in addition to the peculiarity of linking to Wiktionary definitions at all, much less in an "Ada Wikis" top level header. The See also section needs cleanup as well: they are not supposed to be red links. Move'em over into Ext. links as well. --[[User:Marudubshinki |maru]] [[User talk:Marudubshinki| (talk)]] [[Special:Contributions/Marudubshinki | contribs]] 23:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
| |||