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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,335e9f05eb0dcfa0 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-22 06:24:31 PST Path: nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swiss.ans.net!cmcl2!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!thecourier.cims.nyu.edu!nobody From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: SGI inheriting C++ classes ... Date: 22 Nov 1994 09:24:31 -0500 Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences Message-ID: <3asuuv$blb@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> References: <2ECBCF25@SMTPGATE2.STRATCOM.AF.MIL> <3ak8gs$uh@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: gnat.cs.nyu.edu Date: 1994-11-22T09:24:31-05:00 List-Id: Bill, regarding your "no more than 200 calls". You have a very peculiar idea of what is going on. The bindings are not just a bunch of procedure calls that are independent and may or may not be used. For each C++ class that is duplicated exactly on the Ada side, there is a large body of C++, and hence Ada 9X binding, code that describes the structure of the class. When you use such a class in Ada 9X, you may not explicitly be calling all the member functions, but they all have to be properly declared and understood by the 9X binding, so that the data structures, including dispatching tables, are layed out right. Thus a single call, or declaration of an object, in the 9X code, can very well involve hundreds of lines of interface code, which must be exactly right for the single call to work right.