From: Richard Riehle <richard@adaworks.com>
Subject: Re: Implicit Instantiations - was: Re: Why is Ada NOT a good choice for a beginner to programming?
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:04:58 -0800
Date: 2003-01-14T05:55:54+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E23A88A.2C0969B0@adaworks.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: mailman.1042438382.941.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
"Grein, Christoph" wrote:
> It is true, there are some places in Ada where implicit declarations or type
> conversions are done, but implicit instantiations are as yet nowhere.
Implicit type conversions, along with implicit type promotions run
counter to the Ada philosophy.
C++ does not provide the same kind of capability for declaring new
numeric types one has in Ada. This, in spite of the entertaining
example from Mr. Rosen.
Typedef does not do the same thing. We are still left with predefined
types.
The whole idea of Ada is to declare types so they will be checked by
the compiler and so mismatches will be caught. If there is a problem
with that, in the current standard, it needs to be fixed, but implicit
conversions or promotions is simply a bad idea for this language.
Actually, I don't think there is really a problem here wrt Ada, even
after reading your paper.
Richard Riehle
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-14 6:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-13 6:05 Implicit Instantiations - was: Re: Why is Ada NOT a good choice for a beginner to programming? Grein, Christoph
2003-01-14 6:04 ` Richard Riehle [this message]
2003-01-14 20:25 ` Kevin Cline
2003-01-14 21:12 ` Hyman Rosen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-14 6:29 Grein, Christoph
2003-01-15 4:35 ` Richard Riehle
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox