Re: C++0x and Threads - a poor relation to Ada's tasking model?

[REH <spamjunk@stny.rr.com>]

On Aug 14, 7:09 am, John McCabe <j...@nospam.assen.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Under the circumstances I use C/C++ to represent C and C++ as this
> particular example is common to both; they both incorpoate
> overwrapping semantics for operations on integer types (unlike Ada,
> which provides a separate Modular type for that purpose).

C++ and C provide separate types of that purpose also. Signed and
unsigned integers are not the same type. They have different rules.
It's a common misconception that signed integers portably wrap. Signed
integer do not have "overwrapping sematics."

Using C/C++ is frowned upon by both the C and C++ communities. Even in
your simple example, the languages have different rules as to what is
portable.


>
> >Ada has specific requirements for
> >what happens when your Int16 overflows. C++ considered a signed
> >integer overflow undefined behavior. The compiler is allowed to do
> >anything it wants.
>
> Oh dear.

That! That is the only point I was trying to make in answering your
original question of how the communities are different. You are
appalled by that because it is not safe. The C++ community is not
because it allows the compiler maximum flexibility for raw speed.
Which position is "better" wasn't my point, only the fact that the
difference exists.

REH