From: nebbe@lglsun.epfl.ch (Robb Nebbe)
Subject: Re: Ada vs Modula3
Date: 3 Nov 1994 09:38:09 GMT
Date: 1994-11-03T09:38:09+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1994Nov3.102741@lglsun.epfl.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: CynpF4.6Mn@nntpa.cb.att.com
Phil Brooke <pjb25@cam.ac.uk> asked:
> Has anyone got any comments on the relative merits of Modula3 and Ada (9X)?
I found the concept of type in Modula3 to be a little less coherent
than what I was used to in Ada. Modula3 uses structural equivalence
to determine if two types are the same and if you don't want that
you use branded types which are always distinct from other types.
The fact that something abstract like type equivalence can depend on
the implementation bothers me.
I did appreciate the convenience of automatic memory management in
Modula3.
- Robb Nebbe
prev parent reply other threads:[~1994-11-03 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <37dir6$d93@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>
1994-11-02 20:11 ` Ada vs Modula3 Kenneth Almquist
1994-11-03 0:27 ` David Weller
1994-11-03 9:38 ` Robb Nebbe [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox