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,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: Geoff Bull Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/02/08 Message-ID: <36BECA19.483C2A7B@acenet.com.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 441912697 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <77t3ld$nou$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79ce4s$lfq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79chc7$ko6@drn.newsguy.com> <79dodb$rhf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79jeos$bu4@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net> <79k65l$s0t@drn.newsguy.com> <79kd5j$q5r@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nswpull.telstra.net 918473371 203.35.118.1 (Mon, 08 Feb 1999 22:29:31 EST) Organization: Telstra Big Pond Direct MIME-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 22:29:31 EST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java Date: 1999-02-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "James S. Rogers" wrote: > > > Java thread support is actually quite weak compared to that in Ada. > C++ thread support does not exist. > For example, Thread.setPriority () is not guaranteed to do anything to thread priorities - this is a pain in the proverbial. There is no control of thread scheduling policy, a program that works on one platform may fail on another. Also the Runtime.runFinalizersOnExit() method has been deprecated because it is not thread safe. If you can't guarantee that finalizers get run at least once, they are completely useless for some applications (like flushing files when the application exits)! > you can > >build anything you can build with Ada tasks and more (Ada tasks actually > are > >implemented using pthreads on such platforms). > > What do you do when your operating system does not support > posix threads? Does win32 have posix threads? I don't recall seeing posix threads on my MS windows box, > It is human nature to want all things to be familiar. The natural > extension of that in computer languages is that we tend to want all > languages to be like the language we use most. Then, why do I pine for the power for Ada all day everyday when I'm using Java all day everyday (for an application to which Java is not suited)? GB