Re: Newbee question

["James S. Rogers" <jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net>]

"Eric Robert" <synapzzz@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:0dRK9.37601$xH3.400905@weber.videotron.net...
> Well, yes and no. I am not a student anymore and I know quite a few
> languages. But not ADA even if I hear of it when I was a student at the
> University. But one student came to me and ask me to do a little thing in
> ADA. So, I read the Lovelace tutorial from the start to the end and still,
I
> wasn't quite able to do anything usefull.
>
> I must say that, being a senior C++ programmer, ADA seems to me like a
> language that isn't very usefull & efficient. Sorry to say but it seems
like
> a languages for dummies! I when to the library to get a book and now I can
> do usefull stuff. The web is not crowded with ADA samples & resources so I
> needed a book! I can't belive this... The community is much smaller than
> what I'm used to (C and C++). But still : it was worth to learn. It maybe
> good for learning and research (i.e. when you're NOT a experienced
> programmmer) but not for real life usage when CPU & ressources are
critical.
> Sorry but learning it doesn't make me a believer ;-)
>

It does not sound like you have learned it yet.
If you really read the information about Ada you would know that Ada
arrays are not resizable. This is the same as with C and C++.

Ada arrays are not the same as C++ vectors.
This does not mean that you cannot create the equivalent of a C++
vector. It is done pretty much the same way it was done in C++.
You would need to dynamically allocate the array you need.
To enlarge the array you need to dynamically allocate the new
array, copy the old elements into the new array, and deallocate
the old array. This is, after all, what C++ does for its vector
class. Why is it not reasonable that Ada would need a similar
solution?

Did you look at www.adapower.com ?
It has a reasonable number of examples, as well as links to
online text books and tutorials.

When you learn Ada you will also learn how to manage CPU and
resource usage. Admittedly, it does not have the feel of C or C++.
You are not programming in a glorified assembler language.
You have at least as much control over data representations as
you have in C or C++. You have the ability to control code
complexity. You have the ability to call assembler routines.

Just what is missing from Ada that you think makes it not
useful for professional work? Just for grins, how many lines
of Ada code do you guess are running in real systems
around the world today?

To be truthful, your posting quoted above sounds like the
efforts of a troll rather than a report of an honest effort to
learn a language.

Jim Rogers