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: 103376,6b6619eb9cada212 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Chris Powell Subject: Re: Help me to chose between ADA 95 and C++ Date: 1999/12/14 Message-ID: <38564CD6.F13F69FB@rdel.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 560547002 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <01bf37fb$a91afb60$0564a8c0@IS-D2D04C.test> <829rbv$a8m$1@nntp6.atl.mindspring.net> <01bf3e32$0b9dc880$022a6282@dieppe> <385112AE.7E2CFA9@rdel.co.uk> X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: postmaster@rdel.co.uk X-Trace: rdel.co.uk 945179885 5536 172.16.10.14 (14 Dec 1999 13:58:05 GMT) Organization: Blackbox Software UK Ltd Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Dec 1999 13:58:05 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-12-14T13:58:05+00:00 List-Id: Brian Rogoff wrote: > Of course, none of this is really OO, but I think OO is way overrated anyways. > Since you mention STL in the same paragraph as OO, I suppose I should ask > you what you mean by OO. Most people wouldn't consider the STL OO, > including its authors. Its true that the STL is not implemented using OO constructs, but it is conceptually OO, with the concept of a container base class defining methods for manipulating elements, which are overriden to work differently for specific container types and the abstraction of iterators which can work on any type of container... but this wasn't really why I mentioned the STL: If I were to choose Ada 95 for OO programming I would have a safer program, at the expense of more obscure OO syntax. So, in order to use the syntax that I prefer, ie. C++, I need to find ways to make C++ programs safer and one way is to use the STL. Interestingly, many of the OO related pitfalls are evident in Ada 95 and C++, because the way the two languages work is not actually that different, for example attempting to override a method, but mis-typing the name in the derived class making it a new method rather than an overriden one. > I suppose I could be convinced that C++ is more convenient for a "pure OO" > style of programming than Ada. Let's see those examples... I have posted one example. I guess it comes down to how important you think programming elegance is, compared to intrinsic safety. I feel I am experienced enough in C++ to be rarely caught out, but I admit there are some nasty gotchas! Chris.