Re: c++ vs ada results

[andrewd@chook.adelaide.edu.au (Andrew Dunstan)]

In article <1991Jun18.122812.18190@eua.ericsson.se>,
euamts@eua.ericsson.se (Mats Henricson) writes:

|> I have started to see two different kinds of programmers in C++:
|> 1. Library designers
|> 2. Library users
|> 
|> The first kind of programmers is doing some tricky nasty hacking behind the
|> scenes of the interface of the classes, to satisfy the second kind of users.
|> 
|> I have so far only done programming as a library designer, and I think that
|> is *VERY* difficult if you try to produce code that is:
|> a) fast
|> b) not wasting memory
|> c) usable
|> d) reusable (in terms of subclasses)
|> e) etc
|> f) etc
|> g) etc
|> 
|> If you, on the other hand, have a well designed class library to build from,
|> I think C++ is a beautiful and easy language to use.

Yes, but writing libraries should not be so hard. It isn't in Ada.
You've really made a point in Ada's favour.

#######################################################################
#  Andrew Dunstan                   #   There's nothing good or bad   #
#  Department of Computer Science   #   but thinking makes it so.     #
#  University of Adelaide           #                                 #
#  South Australia                  #          - Shakespeare          #
#  net: andrewd@cs.adelaide.edu.au  #                                 #
#######################################################################