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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a00006d3c4735d70
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-10 08:34:12 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!chcgil2-snh1.gtei.net!news.bbnplanet.com!nycmny1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!colt.net!peernews3.colt.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.com!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Certified C compilers for safety-critical embedded systems
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 16:14:51 +0100
Organization: AdaCL
Message-ID: <2255889.jXjmIm6Msp@linux1.krischik.com>
References: <1731094.1f7Irsyk1h@linux1.krischik.com>
 <3ff1b8ef.614528516@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <3FF1E06D.A351CCB4@yahoo.com>
 <3ff20cc8.635997032@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <bsumbs$k9e$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <3ff9df16.30249104@News.CIS.DFN.DE> <1665674.ZrTUW4qaQq@linux1.krischik.com>
 <1073409810.463948@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <NbDKb.505$9b5.388@newssvr29.news.prodigy.com>
 <1073421950.964139@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <E7aLb.776788$Tr4.2231457@attbi_s03>
 <3ffd9d14.1526346@News.CIS.DFN.DE>
 <btlmj0$8o9lq$1@ID-175126.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <1073659951.261166@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <btoqj7$9qtre$1@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de>
 <3ffff826$0$6755$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>
Reply-To: krischik@users.sourceforge.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1073752380 06 17100 I3t1GG2vfvQtmMF 040110 16:33:00
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de
X-ID: biu-vwZaYebBy6CDGpk1aTjq1fwkQWRuJ5Ruov643rU-3kt0ndrFc5
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4309
Date: 2004-01-10T16:14:51+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Frank J. Lhota wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> wrote in message
> news:btoqj7$9qtre$1@ID-77047.news.uni-berlin.de...
> 
>> Strange, I would expect you telling us [rightfully] that in this
> particular
>> case C++ is better than Ada. C++ has abstract arrays (operator[]), Ada
> does
>> not.

> That is why I think that Ada 0y should include a "()" operator, so that we
> would have an abstract array capability, as well as an abstract function
> capability.

Of course it would only be usefull in combination with some form ".."
operator. Otherwise one could not transparently create abstract array.

However I imagine that a ".." operator might my very difficult to define.

With Regards

Martin

-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com