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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,7ee10ec601726fbf X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-28 09:20:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!sea-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Brian Rogoff Subject: Re: is Ada dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20011028091139.J29500-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> References: <3BC264B4.EBB8238@worldnet.att.net> <3BDBC0DC.5080005@mail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:20:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.184.139.136 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: sea-read.news.verio.net 1004289604 206.184.139.136 (Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:20:04 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 17:20:04 GMT Organization: Verio Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:15313 Date: 2001-10-28T17:20:04+00:00 List-Id: On 28 Oct 2001, Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <3BDBC0DC.5080005@mail.com>, Hyman Rosen writes: > > James Rogers wrote: > > > >> Yes. Let's all use a language with common constructs like the > >> following: > >> > >> float (*(*f)())(); > >> > >> This is "simple" C syntax for a pointer to a function returning a > >> pointer to a function returning a float. > > > > > > I could go "nyah nyah" and point out that until Ada 95 came along, > > Ada didn't have pointers to functions. And functions returning > > pointers to functions aren't all that common, so you don't see too > > many declarations like that in typical C or C++ code. > > If they aren't that common, it shouldn't have mattered that Ada83 > did not have them. He said "functions returning pointers to functions" aren't all that common. Ada 83 didn't have "pointers to functions". Those quoted strings aren't equal. Pointers to functions are pretty common, though less so in languages that are object obsessed. In many modern, high level languages (neither C++ nor Ada is in that set) the notion of pointer to function is low level, but functions themselves are first class. When combined with block structure and lexical scope this is a very powerful abstraction mechanism. > If they aren't that common, that should _increase_ the need for > clarity. Well, no one in the C world defends the declaration syntax. Hysterical raisins and all that... -- Brian