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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!yetti!geac!len
From: len@geac.UUCP (Leonard Vanek)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Comparison of C++ and Ada
Message-ID: <597@geac.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Mar-87 09:31:11 EST
Article-I.D.: geac.597
Posted: Mon Mar 23 09:31:11 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 24-Mar-87 04:29:25 EST
Organization: GEAC Computers, Toronto, CANADA
Xref: mnetor comp.lang.c++:188 comp.lang.ada:223
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

I AM REALLY EMBARRASSED!

Last week I offered to post or mail a "semi-detailed comparison of
C++ and Ada" that I had written a while ago. Well, it was so long ago
that I had forgotten exactly what it was that I had written. After
I finally tracked down which computer the machine readable file was
on I realized that I would be more embarrassed to send out the file
than I would be to admit that it is not worth sending.

It was just a slightly modified version of an earlier comparison of
Ada and C. Its purpose was to explain to management the good and bad
points of each language for purposes of developing our applications. As
such, it barely mentions any similarities or any features that are not
obviously relevant to programmer productivity or program efficiency,
and it devotes a fair amount of space to considerations of
what we would get if we bought a specific Ada compiler.

Sorry to have built up your expectations.

Len