IMO, this was the telling paragraph.
IMO, this was the telling paragraph.
Ada is "verbose" in that it has fairly rigorous type specification. It was verbose in comparison to languages that had weak or primitive typing. A lot of the "bureaucracy" in the language is being very specific about types to catch bugs.
Ada 83 did have a problem in that it lacked [interfaces]. This could sometimes limit code reuse.
Ada was designed to be "readable" but so was Pascal and many other languages (and, more recently for instance, Python). "Readability" in those days mainly meant preferring keywords over operators and allowing for infix notation with proper order-of-operations.
https://www.adaic.org/resources/add_content/standards/05rat/...
A explicit strong, statically typed language is going to have a lot of text in the file about types. When Ada came out this was a jarring concept for a lot of people (especially C programmers) which lead to the "Ada is a bureaucratic language" complaint. In fact, Ada has stuff like operator overloading where C, for instance, does not. But it absolutely has types and they absolutely are not optional and are explicit.