Re: Ada in Australia (was Ada ad in Embedded Systems Programming stinks)

[Robb.Nebbe@di.epfl.ch (Robb Nebbe)]

In article <38v140$sdu@sunb.ocs.mq.edu.au>, cperrott@krakatoa.mqcs.mq.oz.au (Chris Perrott) writes:

|> Are the visibility structures of Ada 83 really any better than those of C++?
|> Doesn't Ada 83 suffer from the lack of a structure larger than a package,
|> something like the new C++ namespace?

Actually since Ada's packages aren't coupled with types it is a much
more flexible encapsulation mechanism than classes in C++. In Ada 83
you could put anything you wanted in a package including other packages
so it is certainly large enough. (Child packages are a better solution
IMHO).

Namespaces in C++ are being added to patch up a known defficiency
in the language and make it easier to reuse software. Fortunately
Ada 83 already had a very workable solution to namespace management.

- Robb Nebbe