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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3a9b49a9162025eb X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-02-07 22:39:53 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!beamish.news.atl.earthlink.net!guinness.news.atl.earthlink.net!news.atl.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: Richard Riehle Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Bye-bye Ada ? (Ada95 Wholesale Changes?) Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2003 22:49:14 -0800 Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering Message-ID: <3E44A869.DDB2352@adaworks.com> References: <3E3B7BB5.A1A070@adaworks.com> <3NY_9.9226$x63.6255@nwrddc01.gnilink.net> <3E40A07A.CD174746@adaworks.com> <1044457651.769640@master.nyc.kbcfp.com> <3E42A61C.20905@cogeco.ca> <3E432DD4.7F256C85@adaworks.com> <3E43FA31.9873C5AA@adaworks.com> Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 41.b2.71.df Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 8 Feb 2003 06:39:52 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:33908 Date: 2003-02-08T06:39:52+00:00 List-Id: Kevin Cline wrote: > Richard Riehle wrote in message news:<3E43FA31.9873C5AA@adaworks.com>... > > Hyman Rosen wrote: > > > > > If the function is inline and you change its implementation, > > > the compiler is going to want to recompile all its callers. > > > > But no change to corresponding specifications. The only thing > > that needs to be recompiled is the implementating code and that > > is compiled separately within package bodies. This preserves > > the integrity of the design. Also, there is no need to modify > > any code, only to recompile a few of the bodies. > > > > This is substantially different from the C++ model. > > I don't see the substantial difference, except that in C++ the > same syntax can not be used for data access and a niladic function call. In C++, an inline function must be fully implemented in the class specification. In Ada, one cannot include an implementation in a specification. The implementing code is separately compiled in the body. This means that one need not recompile the declarations when changing the implementation, in Ada. In C++, any change to the implementation requires recompilation of all the dependent and derived class declarations. This is a substantial difference. Richard Riehle