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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada Date: 1996/03/15 Message-ID: <4ictukINN7j1@mayne.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 142902026 references: <4hl082INNc7d@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca> organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++ Date: 1996-03-15T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , AdaWorks wrote: > No language can help you "do the right job." Languages such as Ada > and Eiffel are designed to maximize the help one can get from the > compiler to "do the job right." C++ also defines a language that > makes it possible to get more help from the compiler. Surely, no one > would ever suggest that C is such a language. If it were, there would > not be such a huge aftermarket for product such as Purify. The C standard needs to be updated to demand more ``compiler help'' and other environment features, and a validation suite needs to be made part of the standard. > There are certainly times when one does not want to get a lot of help > from the compiler. There are some exceptionally bright people who > do not require such help. However, when it is appropriate to seek the > a lot of help from a compiler, one clear choice is Ada. The trouble is that it's not help to all the organizations that depend on C. The choice of language is sometimes dictated by other factors than just technical merit. Especially the _continued_ use of a particular language. Most of the C problems lie, arguably, with the inadequate coverage by the standard of certain issues, not with the syntax and semantics of the language per se. The standard doesn't require compilers to implement range checking. Hence we have compilers without range checking. And so forth. --