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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1d52a75fd633fefc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-02-25 07:24:04 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed1.earthlink.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.mindspring.net!not-for-mail From: Marin David Condic Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada to C++ translator? Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 10:21:31 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: <3A9922FB.5D5C0479@acm.org> References: <3A844255.24A4DBA3@lmco.com> <3A866B28.CE67B4A0@yyy.zzz> <3A8C6AA3.3F90043D@lmco.com> <%Wvk6.102$aw5.380@www.newsranger.com> <9713k0$6ao$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <976jbu$3p4$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3A97DFCD.3010503@acm.org> <3A9809FD.D9194D0E@acm.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.b9.22 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 25 Feb 2001 15:22:22 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (WinNT; I) Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5521 Date: 2001-02-25T15:22:22+00:00 List-Id: Well, yes, in theory. However, in practice, I think that what was intended was actually achieved. Do you remember Pascal compilers wherein the deviations were of the form "I think feature X is inefficient or hard to implement, so I modified the syntax and semantics to give you feature Y and no other compiler did it the same way." Of course, Pascal was a fairly simple language, yet it still had deviations from the "standard" definition in most compilers. More complex languages were worse. What we have today is a case where compilers purporting to be "Ada Compilers" don't do screwy things like not implement Tasks (because its too hard) or change the memory allocation/deallocation scheme from new/Unchecked_Deallocation to some other scheme like mark/new/delete (because its more efficient). Sure, there may be missing annexes and you may find some corner-case in the language that doesn't work right, but mostly you get the full language. At least I know of no important exceptions. I think that's a useful improvement that Ada brought along and ought to be a selling point because AFAIK, C++ is a long way from this goal. MDC Ken Garlington wrote: > With a caveat that the term "full language" could mean (a) the Ada83 > dialect, (b) some subset of the Ada95 annexes, or even (c) known cases where > a validation test fails. > > The reality is that a vendor can hopefully tell you which tests will pass > for a given environment (compiler switches, etc.), as well as any known > deficiencies. You may or may not be able to derive something useful from > that information with regard to how much of the language is actually > implemented. -- ============================================================= Marin David Condic - Pace Micro - http://www.pacemicro.com/ Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g Visit my web site at: http://www.mcondic.com/ "I'd trade it all for just a little more" -- Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10] =============================================================