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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d8567bda6086509f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ted Dennison Subject: Re: What about Ada? Date: 1996/08/08 Message-ID: <320A347D.794BDF32@escmail.orl.mmc.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 172984377 references: content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Lockheed Martin Information Systems mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada x-mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3_U1 sun4m) Date: 1996-08-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: H Marx wrote: > > Hi there, > I signed onto this list to find out what Ada is about. But so far saw > only Psacal vs. C vs. Assembler...? People like to post provocative questions here that are crossposted to naturally antagonistic groups. The replies tend to dominate the traffic here (out of proportion to most people's interest in them). Welcome to USENET. > I use Borland Pascal 7.0 and assembler a lot. But it has limitations. > -What would be the reasons for me to use Ada? The best reason over Borland Pascal is support of multi-threaded algorithms (tasking). > -How portable is it? If you stick to the defined language, quite portable. If you need to use platform-specific libraries, then obviously that code won't be portable. (Only very simple I/O is defined in the Ada standard.) > -Are there "Integerated Developers enviroments" available? Sure. Ada vendors sort of pioneered this approach, although few have ever been quite as snazzy as Visual C++. > -Does it use DOS Seg:Ofs memory scheme's, PMode, 32-bit flat? It depends on the compiler. > -Can you use it in Windows? For windows? There are windows compilers, yes. > -How good is it's database support? If you want to make your own simple databases, you can use standard Ada with no problem. Otherwise, you will have to use some sort of interface library (just like with any other language). > -Does it allow function and operator overloading? Yup. > -How optimised/fast is the code it produces? It depends on the compiler. Some are quite mature (=> good). > Someone remarked on the list that Ada does not allow Macro's, but does > give you the option of using OOP or Procedural. Just like macro's can be > abused, so can OOP, and I would like to have liked the option of using > macros. (Pascal does not allow it either:-( Ada programs can (and do) allow the use of generic units (much like C++ templates) to achieve the same effect in a much less error-prone manner. If you still want macros, there's nothing stopping you from using your own pre-processor. -- T.E.D. | Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.mmc.com | | Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net | | URL - http://www.iag.net/~dennison |