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: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: fraser@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fraser Wilson)
Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because...
Date: 1996/07/18
Message-ID: <4skpgu$ta@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 168671984
distribution: world
references: <JSA.96Jul5145911@organon.com> <dewar.836572544@schonberg>
 <31E402B4.55EC@csehp3.mdc.com> <4se1cl$mp@salyko.cube.net>
 <4sgeme$r32@salyko.cube.net>
organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-07-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


okellogg@cube.net (Oliver Kellogg) writes:

>	#include <string.h>
>	char *replicate (char c, int times)
>	{
>	  char *buffer = (char *) malloc (times);
>	  return (char *) memset (buffer, c, times);
>	}

>is not that much less elegant either :-)

Well, that's a matter of taste.  I prefer the Ada version -- the C one
has a lot of really ugly low-level stuff.  I mean, typecasts?  It looks
as though you're trying to do something naughty (but that's a way of
life in C, isn't it?).

Two advantages that the Ada code has are:
	1. it didn't require the caller to clean up allocated memory, and
	2. you were able to write it first time without introducing a
	   rather nasty (and common) bug that appears in the C code.

Fraser.
--
    ____ Fraser Wilson          | email: fraser@cs.mu.oz.au     __o
    \  / The more I learn of    | voice: +61 3 9287 9193      _-\<,_
     \/  C++, the more I like   | fax:   +61 3 9348 1184     (_)/ (_)
           --- Ada 95 ---       | www:   http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fraser/