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: 103376,2cdc6c2ee911fe77
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Gary <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com>
Subject: Re: Ada vs. C++
Date: 2000/02/11
Message-ID: <38A42AE8.478DB03F@lmtas.lmco.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 584579003
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <38A37C97.9E181025@interact.net.au> <880g59$fv03@ftp.kvaerner.com>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: LMTAS
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-02-11T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Then there is REXX.  REXX has fairly decent (straightforward, easy to understand)
syntax.  I vastly prefer REXX to PERL.  NetREXX can be used in place of JAVA to
simplify those types of tasks as well.

"Tarjei T. Jensen" wrote:

> G wrote in message <38A37C97.9E181025@interact.net.au>...
> >  Has anyone done any measurements on the different speeds and
> >memory requirements of comparable applications written in C++
> >and Ada95.  I am learning both languages.
>
> I don't think anything like that is available.
>
> Anyway, leaning two languages at once may not be a good idea. I suggest you
> concentrate on Ada first and then apply what you have learnt to C++. It should
> make learning C++ a LOT easier.
>
> You may want to read the december issue of the Linux journal (The interview
> with the author of the Bazaar and the Cathedral). The interesting thing is the
> rise of Python as a scripting language. It is claimed that 90% of  errors in
> "working" software is related to memory management. Ada is probably better at
> managing its use of memory than C++.
>
> The key to Python success in a Perlified world is ETS (effort to solution). It
> is less effort to write scripts in Python than in Perl. Perl has a lot of bells
> and whistles, but have a horrible syntax.
>
> Greetings,