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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,ab1d177a5a26577d
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.in2p3.fr!in2p3.fr!kanaga.switch.ch!switch.ch!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 00:31:50 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm-host.bauhaus@maps.futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110123 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What's wrong with C++?
References: 
 <1ee1a434-4048-48f6-9f5e-d8126bebb808@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
 <4d5c105a$0$32660$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <wcczkpvojrk.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
In-Reply-To: <wcczkpvojrk.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d5c5e66$0$6978$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 Feb 2011 00:31:50 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: ee3be2e7.newsspool4.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=V8lAb?V5\nPHigV@eW57PQ4IUK<Cl32<Q4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF<OcfhCO[5Z>JX:g[>0XPCY\c7>ejVXFiN3FX3c6X\?91RQ=Y:LHR
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17317
Date: 2011-02-17T00:31:50+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/16/11 8:35 PM, Robert A Duff wrote:
> Hyman Rosen<hyrosen@mail.com>  writes:
>
>> A second problem is that C++ leaves the order of evaluation of
>> subexpressions in an expression undefined, unlike Java.
>
> Ada shares this flaw with C++.
>
> The reason is to allow the compiler to choose the most efficient order.
> But I think it's possible to design a language that gets the best
> of both worlds (allow that sort of efficiency, without the portability
> problems).

"As mentioned in the original overview of ParaSail, implicit
parallelism is at the heart of ParaSail (and of its name!).  Every
procedure/function call with multiple parameters involves implicit
parallelism, in that all of the parameters are evaluated in
parallel.  Handoff semantics is used for writable parameters,
meaning that a (non-concurrent) object that is writable by one
parameter evaluation, isn't available to any other parameter
evaluation.  Operations on concurrent objects are not ordered."

http://parasail-programming-language.blogspot.com/2009/10/parasails-implicit-parallelism.html