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 X-Google-Thread: 10db24,fec75f150a0d78f5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public From: kcline@sun132.spd.dsccc.com (Kevin Cline) Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada Date: 1996/04/01 Message-ID: <4jp388$d56@tpd.dsccc.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 145260002 references: <31582A63.4BE9@east.thomsoft.com> <4jeel1$erh@tpd.dsccc.com> organization: DSC Communications Corporation Switch Products Division newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.edu Date: 1996-04-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Jon S Anthony wrote: >In article <4jeel1$erh@tpd.dsccc.com> kcline@sun132.spd.dsccc.com (Kevin Cline) writes: > >> >Well, I'll give it a shot. This year, it'll be Wintel, PowerPC/Win NT, >> >Sun/Solaris, HP-UX and (I believe) PowerPC/AIX. We also expect Wintel >> >cross to 32 bit X86 this year. Various PowerPC and 68K cross early next >> >year. >> > >> >> Well, that means that today's ObjectAda would not solve >> my 1993 problem: writing a Motif application for SunOS 4.1.3, >> Solaris, and SGI IRIX. > >Other than the GCC C compiler, what C compiler could do this now or in >1993? None. As usual, you missed the point, Jon. Different Ada-83 compiler vendors provided different bindings to key functionality like UNIX OS calls and X/Motif. Of course these bindings were proprietary. This was never a problem for C code. ANSI-C compilers have been available for every platform you can name for many years, so porting C code from one vendor's compiler to another was never a big problem. >What your point is wrt to the situation today? 1. I wanted to know if there was something I should have done differently back then. Apparently there wasn't. Ada-83 just sucked for non-embedded application development. 2. I wanted to know if the situation had improved. 3. I wanted to explain to Ada advocates why developing portable UNIX applications was impossible with Ada-83. >Since Ada95 _portably_ interfaces with C, >thin bindings give you everything you get with C (or C++). There is some information I can use. >Jon Anthony >Organon Motives, Inc. >1 Williston Road, Suite 4 >Belmont, MA 02178 With an attitude like Jon's, I would imagine this is a single-employee organization. -- Kevin Cline