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: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: Mukesh Prasad Subject: Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? (WAS: Re: Avoiding the second historic mistake) Date: 1997/06/19 Message-ID: <33A94321.A7E20FAA@polaroid.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 251117779 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> <33A9338D.10BB@polaroid.com> <2syb86adv4.fsf@hpodid2.eurocontrol.fr> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) 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: Steve Jones - JON wrote: > Mukesh Prasad writes: > > > > > 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? > [snip] > > > > 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. > > This seems a very strange test, for a very paticular enviroment, using > > Ada OpenGL bindings I could do it quickly without having to worry > about > any coding errors. There is no implicit speed difference that I have The point was -- if I am implementing OpenGL and I want to do it in Ada, what are the pluses and minuses? OpenGL can be implemented relatively straight-forwadly in C and most probably was. Should OpenGL developers have considered Ada for this task? (Notice the original comment was that if you are doing this type of task, you should think carefully before picking Ada.) If the basic assumption is that all the "low level" work has been done by third parties and all that's needed is some glue code, then maybe the advantages of Ada stand up without needing more considerations in the metric. But in that case, perhaps you need to show how Ada relates to Visual Basic -- C or C++ would be wrong languages for this particular comparison.