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,ed3864cb23152ae6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: fraser@mundook.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fraser Wilson)
Subject: Re: C++'s pointer vs Ada's Access type
Date: 1996/08/01
Message-ID: <4tpke4$9p8@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 172458771
distribution: world
references: <31FFD4A6.41C6@afit.af.mil> <DvFu6E.Atz.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
organization: Comp Sci, University of Melbourne
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-08-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


stt@henning.camb.inmet.com (johndoe) writes:

>Ding-yuan Sheu (dsheu@afit.af.mil) wrote:

>: 	int	Array[100];
>: 	ip = &Array;
>: 	for (i:=0;i++,99) { (*ip+i)   = 0; }

[ ... ]

[Tuck]
>In any case, the corresponding Ada would generally not use
>pointers at all:

>    An_Array : array (1..100) of Integer;

>    for I in An_Array'Range loop
>        An_Array(I) := 0;
>    end loop;

You're being very polite, Tuck, and I guess the reason is that Sheu
might want something more general, but I just can't resist letting
C and C++ people know when Ada, for want of a better phrase, kicks
butt so well.  Array initialisation is one of those areas:

	An_Array : array (1 .. 100) of Integer;

	An_Array := (others => 0);

(The C++ way has to be more efficient though, because it's closer
to the machine.  Not.)

Fraser (a frustrated Ada programmer who has to speak C++ at the moment)