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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ffce418d7a49585f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-21 06:00:40 PST
Path: 
 bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!netnews.summit.novell.com!netnews.summit.novell.com!not-for-mail
From: jls@summit.novell.com (-mlc-+Schilling J.)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: C++ bashing (was Re: Vendor bashing? Sort of.)
Date: 20 Sep 1994 09:58:47 -0400
Organization: Novell, Summit
Message-ID: <35mpqnINNi2e@marble.summit.novell.com>
References: <Cw4Iz2.5yJ@inmet.camb.inmet.com> <359ia6$lkj@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>
 <35isfn$pqd@felix.seas.gwu.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: marble.summit.novell.com
Date: 1994-09-20T09:58:47-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <35isfn$pqd@felix.seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes:
>
>C++ chugged out of AT&T as a preprocessor

Saying this (because the first C++ compilers happened to take advantage
of C as an already existing, portable code generator) is equivalent to 
calling GNAT a preprocessor (because it happens to take advantage of the
gcc back end as an already existing, portable code generator).

In fact, both are true compilers, not preprocessors.  Their choice of
intermediate representations carries with them both benefits and costs, 
as is always true in compiler design.

-- 
Jonathan Schilling
Novell, UNIX Systems Group (UNIX System Laboratories)
jls@summit.novell.com