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: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,3d3f20d31be1c33a,start X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Mukesh Prasad Subject: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? (WAS: Re: Avoiding the second historic mistake) Date: 1997/06/19 Message-ID: <33A9338D.10BB@polaroid.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 251104462 References: <33957A33.1C31AB44@oma.com> <865898351snz@nezumi.demon.co.uk> <339ED54C.215A5F85@oma.com> <5noc8u$a8m$3@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> <33A032AC.2D8BA85C@oma.com> <5nrn86$cvo$3@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> <33A1CBBB.B0602EC@oma.com> <5o2uls$ku3$2@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> <33A6ADDA.2099EEB9@oma.com> <33A7D2DE.545B@polaroid.com> Organization: Polaroid Corporation Reply-To: prasadm@polaroid.com Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++ Date: 1997-06-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Jon S Anthony wrote: > > If I were to do heavy-duty graphics, compression, or image > > processing involving implementation of state-of-the-art algorithms, > > I would think very carefully before choosing Ada. > > Why? Well, I must admit that I haven't done anything in Ada since 1983, and even then it was small programs. The impression I recall mostly was that it was highly typed (the word I reflexively thought of was "regimented", but that is not an accurate description for language features,) so many of the things I would do in C/C++ in implemeting a graphics or compression algorithm would be cumbersome or difficult to do efficiently. But assuming you are current in Ada, and if you wish to dispel the notion that such work is easier in C/C++, perhaps you (or anybody else volunteering) could post a brief segment on how one would scan-convert a triangle and set up the bits on a CGA (without taking advantage of graphics libraries from vendors -- since in C/C++ much of such work happens even before vendor libraries are in place.) Let us say the platform is basic MSDOS (where C was actually used heavily in 80s for much low-level graphics work). Actually, a rectangle would be a better test of Ada's capabilities. A triangle would require you to pick up Breshenham or DDA or something, which is not relevant to language capabilities as such. The CGA part, on the other hand, is important -- since it shows how Ada deals with abnormal programming situations. As long as everything was done from first principles, I think this would provide a good test.