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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FROM_WORDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1d52a75fd633fefc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-21 04:42:06 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!cyclone2.usenetserver.com!news-out.usenetserver.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr10-int.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Ken Garlington" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3A844255.24A4DBA3@lmco.com> <3A866B28.CE67B4A0@yyy.zzz> <3A8C6AA3.3F90043D@lmco.com> <%Wvk6.102$aw5.380@www.newsranger.com> Subject: Re: Ada to C++ translator? Organization: Prodigy (ex-FlashNet) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Message-ID: <2HOk6.1999$yw.110959740@newssvr10-int.news.prodigy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.65.209.48 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr10-int.news.prodigy.com 982759230 6207069 65.65.209.48 (Wed, 21 Feb 2001 07:40:30 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 07:40:30 EST Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:40:31 GMT Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5391 Date: 2001-02-21T12:40:31+00:00 List-Id: "Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen" wrote in message news:umqlmr09ui2.fsf@gong10.clustra.com... : "Ken Garlington" writes: : : : : > "This has always been the case with Ada. I remember early X meetings : > where we were trying to get a compiler bug fixed for a large package, and : > being told that "the problem is that you're not coding it using the : > preferred Ada style." I remember A-12 being attacked because we didn't use : > tasking. The attackers didn't care about any silly compiler problems, etc. : > They just knew we "weren't Ada enough" if we didn't use tasking. After all, : > they could get tasking to work on their PC; what's the problem?.... : > : > On the projects where we used C++, I don't believe we've ever had anyone say : > we weren't "C++ enough" because we constrained the use of templates. Quite : > the contrary - there's an active effort to develop a standard C++ subset : > (EC++) for use in certain domains, without any fear of being arrested by the : > "C++ police" for subsetting the language. Why would someone want to use a : > language with a built-in Inquisition? : > : > : : If the advantages outweigh the inquistion, I would consider switching : :-) : : Seriously, what is your opinion on today's thread support in Ada? Do you mean for a particular compiler/target pair, or tasking at the language level? As to the former, you'd have to tell me the particular context before I could give an intelligent answer (which was one of the points of my previous post :). As to the latter, I don't see anything inherent in the language that prevents a compiler from doing what you want (particularly now that protected objects are available). There would likely have to be some restrictions placed on the form of the task; see section D.7 of the Ada Rationale for examples. Of course, you can usually use alternatives to Ada tasking, such as direct calls to a POSIX-compliant run-time a la C as well, so it's certainly no worse that what you'll get in other languages.