From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 109fba,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: f43e6,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid109fba,gid115aec,gidf43e6,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "Jerry Coffin" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) Date: 25 Mar 2005 15:45:48 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1111794348.874993.298340@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> References: <4229bad9$0$1019$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <1110032222.447846.167060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org> <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk> <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02> <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <1111607633.301232.62490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1111628011.160315.134740@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.64.130.76 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1111794353 15269 127.0.0.1 (25 Mar 2005 23:45:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 23:45:53 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: G2/0.2 Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=68.64.130.76; posting-account=mZiOqwwAAAC5YZsJDHJLeReHGPXV5ENp Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10002 comp.lang.c++:47298 comp.realtime:1728 comp.software-eng:5344 Date: 2005-03-25T15:45:48-08:00 List-Id: jayessay wrote: [ ... ] > > A preprocessor per so, no. The type of capabilities is a different > > story. For example, Lisp includes macros. Most assemblers include > > (much more extensive) macros as well as an eqiuvalent of C's > > #if/#ifdef/#ifndef/#endif. > > Lisp macros are _not_ a preprocessor and they are _vastly_ more > capable than what people typically think of when they see/hear > "macros". Lisp macros are full code analyzing and generating > constructs. I very specifcally said they were not in a preprocessor, and merely that they provide capabilities similar to those available in the preprocessor in C++. It's true that they provide considerably more in addition, but it's more or less beside the point -- which was that Ada provides substantially less still. Lisp only came into the conversation at all because it was implied that the C preprocessor was _so_ unusual that nothing else provided even vaguely similar capabilities. The substantially more capable Lisp macros were mentioned only to point out that my comparison was not to something utterly unique. I certainly did not mean to imply any particularly strong similarity between C macros and those in Lisp. As far as that goes, most assemblers have far more macro capability as well -- but again, it's more or less beside the point. > Robert Duff made a comment a while ago about how silly most (I would > say without much hyperbole 99+%) of the points in these threads would > be to Lisp (and Smalltalk) folks. I couldn't agree more. As usualy, I disagree -- and I also use Lisp part of the time, and have not only used Smalltalk, but written a fairly substantial part of a Smalltalk implementation. Then again, I also remember watching/listening to arguments between people using various flavors of Lisp (before CL came along) about things like whether it was correct to equate an empty list with "false". IIRC, I probably used Pascal at the time, and compared to the differences between FORTRAN IV and Pascal, these differences could have been seen as quite trivial. Nonetheless, I didn't and don't see the arguments as silly from either direction. I see people who have chosen particular areas in which to pursue their vision of perfection. While I consider it perfectly reasonable to disagree with them, I hope I never become so self-satisfied or condescending as to pronounce their concerns or vision as "silly" or anything like it. -- Later, Jerry. The universe is a figment of its own imagination.