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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8947310381c2a3f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Norman H. Cohen" Subject: Re: Ada & Encryption / Compression Date: 1997/03/05 Message-ID: <331DA57B.A79@watson.ibm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 223626187 References: <5fikh7$ras$1@nargun.cc.uq.edu.au> Organization: IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center Reply-To: ncohen@watson.ibm.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-03-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: David Downie wrote: > I am thinking about writing an RSA encryption (or some other encryption) > package. I would like to do it in Ada (rather than the suggested C), but > am not an Ada expert and do not know if I would just be making things > difficult for myself. Bit manipulation is as easy with Ada-95 modular types as with C. If you're using Ada 83 instead of Ada 95, you have to write unchecked conversions to and from packed arrays of booleans, which is a mild nuisance, but not a serious obstacle. By using Ada instead of C, you are most likely making things easier for yourself, because Ada's compile-time and run-time checks will reduce your debugging effort. -- Norman H. Cohen mailto:ncohen@watson.ibm.com http://www.research.ibm.com/people/n/ncohen