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: 7 Jul 93 00:39:55 GMT
From: cis.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!tully
.CS.Berkeley.EDU!hilfingr@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Paul N. Hilfinger)
Subject: Re: Admiral Tuttle
Message-ID: <21d60r$1ef@agate.berkeley.edu>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Admiral Tuttle's remarks contain at least one odd comment:

In article <1993Jul6.203058.4738@oracorp.com>, davidg@oracorp.com (David Guaspa
ri) writes:

> ADA  does  not  effectively  support object-oriented
> programming  --  distributed  computing -- and massively parallel processors
> now  --  and  ADA  9X  will  not  provide  many  capabilities already widely
> available through C++ and parallel implementations of C.

I was not aware that any capabilities are "WIDELY available" through
"parallel implementations" of C (I presume he means "implementations
of C with extensions supporting parallelism").  What is he referring
to here?

Also, what are the capabilities he refers to that Ada 9X will not
provide?  I am particularly curious about what HE is referring to, not
what others of us might answer to the question "What is Ada 9X
missing?"

Paul Hilfinger