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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: rgilbert@polaris.orl.mmc.com (Bob Gilbert)
Subject: Ada Generics (was Re: OO, C++, and something much better!)
Date: 1997/01/07
Message-ID: <5au0ss$sin@zeus.orl.mmc.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 208313320
references: <5arhb0$d4e@top.mitre.org>
organization: Lockheed Martin E&M
reply-to: rgilbert@polaris.orl.mmc.com
newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng
Date: 1997-01-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <5arhb0$d4e@top.mitre.org>, mfb@mbunix.mitre.org (Michael F Brenner) writes:
> Yes, there is some added flexibility in C++ templates over Ada generics,
> and vice versa too. The added flexibility in C++ templates comes from the
> ability to expand them at compile time without losing optimizations, unlike
> Ada generics whose paradigm is to expand at run-time and remove staticness
> from expressions. 

Most of the Ada comilers I've used do expand the generic instantiation at
compile time.  Could somebody offer up an example of where this would not
be possible?

-Bob