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: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Fredric L. Rice" Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/02/09 Message-ID: <36BF88AC.CF196C7B@linkline.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 442226872 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$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79fm3e$ffs$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: The Skeptic Tank MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java Date: 1999-02-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen wrote: > > So if C++ is better than Ada because the standard library > > has a sort built in, and therefore allows a shorter sorting > > routine, by the same argument APL must be even better than > > C++, since the sorting is even more built in, and we can > > get an even shorter sorting routine. > Yes. And from this I infer that you think that any standardization of > libraries, or even built-in functions are a waste of time? > No, the point is that C++ has recently take a major step forward with > the acceptance of a standard library which is rather comprehensive and > has a sound foundation. Arguing that this is not needed in Ada is not > going to convince anyone to use Ada. Hell, no matter what Ada does -- venders and uses and programmers -- the fact is that C++ has a plethora of extremely useful libraries that make computer software look and feel alike in so many ways that end-users have come to expect what could almost be considered a standard. Specifically, GUI with a pop-up behavior, mechanical looking push buttons et al. The Borland libraries make programming such applications easily enough that non-programmers can hack something up in a day or two to do whatever it is they need. Until Ada acquired a set of libraries that make applications written in Ada look like they were written in Borland's or Microsoft's Windows class libraries, I don't think Ada - derived applications are going to be very popular. Understand that I know squat about Ada as this point. I've just never heard of any popular applications out in the real world having been written in Ada. It seems to me that everything these days is done in C++ with assembly language blocks.