It became clear that the author isn't willing to consider anything that isn't 100% perfect in every way anymore. One tool needs some work - your whole language is out.
Ada is on my list of languages to learn something about (more than the 12 languages in 10 weeks class I took back when I got my degree which is the only time I touched it). It has some interesting features (particularly the SPARK variant)
We should cut people some slack about this, especially considering that the language itself is case insensitive :P
I'm not sure what actually triggers the confusion about this, but it is Ada, not ADA. It's not an acronym, I'm curious about the origin of the incorrect all caps version, but it seems like there's a forgotten historical reason for this.
> It became clear that the author isn't willing to consider anything that isn't 100% perfect in every way anymore.
Not "perfect", "their way". Things like variadic generics or arity overloading are not about perfection (there are excellent reasons not to have them).
And it's fine to want things and not be willing to compromise — which is what OP did, incidentally.
But it has nothing to do with "perfection", and your take is very much unhelpful and inflamatory.
Ada is on my list of languages to learn something about (more than the 12 languages in 10 weeks class I took back when I got my degree which is the only time I touched it). It has some interesting features (particularly the SPARK variant)