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: 30 Sep 92 13:11:46 GMT
From: mcsun!sunic!lth.se!newsuser@uunet.uu.net  (Dag Bruck)
Subject: Re: Ada's (in)visibility in the engineering community
Message-ID: <1992Sep30.131146.2225@lth.se>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In <comp.lang.ada> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>
>I'm curious; have
>you had large numbers of people from "the C++ community" denying that
>any parts of C++ were inspired by Ada?

I think that to some extent it depends on how precise you want to be.
I usually simplify matters and tell people that exception handling in
C++ is "just like Ada."  There are of course important differences,
and I know them.  If you want to be more precise you must also mention
influences from other languages, e.g., Clu, Mesa, ML and PL/I.  In
that situation it is easy to answer "absolutely not" if someone asks
if EH in C++ is like EH in Ada.

The C++ community as I know it is not afraid to acknowledge influences
from other languages.  People sometimes make rude jokes about Ada, but
that is not relevant.

In my experience, the C++ community is not very interested in Ada,
which probably is a pity.  I don't really understand why some people
in the Ada community spend so much time comparing with C++; isn't Ada
good enough in itself?  Does it really matter much who's influenced
who?  I think it smells of envy because C++ is a greater commercial
success.

		Dag Bruck
		Member of the C++ community