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=2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_DATE, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!apollo!tedg From: tedg@apollo.HP.COM (Ted Grzesik) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Socioeconomics, Ada, C++ Message-ID: <51b75550.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> Date: 22 May 91 14:58:00 GMT References: <1991May18.022831.20653@grebyn.com> Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM Reply-To: tedg@apollo.HP.COM (Ted Grzesik) Organization: Hewlett-Packard Apollo Division - Chelmsford, MA List-Id: In article <1991May18.022831.20653@grebyn.com> ted@grebyn.com (Ted Holden) writes: > >...(unimportant blathering deleted)... >there are several FAR better answers out there in common usage, the most >obvious of which is C++. Ahhhhhhh. Ignorance is bliss. I don't see C++ as such a great answer. It's not even a certified standard yet. "Common usage" /= "FAR better answer". > >...(more unimportant blathering deleted)... >are involved with Ada itself, the real kicker is that we are about to >see the entire mainstream of American computer science using C++, and Perhaps object-oriented programming, but certainly not C++. The only thing that stops me from calling Ada an OO language is that it stuck with a procedural hierarchy defining objects instead of an object hierarchy defining procedures. Does this guy Ted Holden hold stock in some C++ development firm? Why the big push for C++? Just my opinions. Ted Grzesik Massachusetts Language Lab Hewlett-Packard Company tedg@apollo.hp.com Chelmsford, MA (508) 256-6600 x5959 "Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities." -- Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens)