From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 15 Aug 91 03:23:41 GMT From: netcomsv!jls@apple.com (Jim Showalter) Subject: Re: re-use and concurrency Message-ID: <1991Aug15.032341.8567@netcom.COM> List-Id: brossard@sic.epfl.ch (Alain Brossard EPFL-SIC/SII) writes: [stuff aout Booch Components in Ada vs C++ deleted] >To me it looks like Ada is losing big to C++... Well, it seems rather simplistic to me to decide that one language is inferior to another because it lacks inheritance. If it is valid to seize on a single language feature as the sole basis for comparison, why not beat up on C++ for lacking concurrency support? Surely concurrency is as necessary to developing software as inheritance? Or do you live in a world with only one thread? Furthermore, there are all sorts of other things C++ lacks that Ada has, none the least of which is a standard definition and compiler validation. To ignore issues like this and focus exclusively on inheritance does a disservice to those who are trying to wade through the hype to make an informed language choice. -- * Jim Showalter, software engineering consultant * * e-mail: jls@netcom.com * * voice : (408) 243-0630 * * data : (408) 984-5019 *