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: 103376,1042f393323e22da
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: NKSW39B@prodigy.com (Matthew Givens)
Subject: Re: Any research putting c above ada?
Date: 1997/04/20
Message-ID: <5jddr6$mqm@newssvr01-int.news.prodigy.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 236156193
Distribution: world
References: <5ih6i9$oct$1@waldorf.csc.calpoly.edu>
 <5ijb0o$ajc@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>
 <334d3da5.14386594@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
 <2senchydgk.fsf@hpodid2.eurocontrol.fr> <5im3an$3dv@bcrkh13.bnr.ca>
 <33526cbf.41c6@cca.rockwell.com> <5iusvd$118e@newssvr01-int.news.prodigy.com>
 <33530e22.5940@worldnet.att.net> <5j18h3$1564@newssvr01-int.news.prodigy.com>
 <5j8ukr$lu9@nntpa.cb.lucent.com>
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


ka@socrates.hr.lucent.com (Kenneth Almquist) wrote:
>
>
>Not a terribly convincing example, from my perspective.  First, there
>is rarely reason to do this.  C and Ada provide library routines for
>case conversion.  Calling them is "simple and easy," and they handle
>the local character set, so that code which uses them is portable to 
the
>systems using different character sets.

Of course it's not convincing.  It was intended to be an example of data 
mixing with a purpose.  It was the first one that sprang to mind, so I 
used it.

>Second, the Ada equivalent to your example is not that complex:
>
>	Character'val(Character'pos('A') + 32)

Yes, I know, but why take extra effort to "code around" something, then 
call that a benefit?

>This is more verbose because of the conversions, but the conversions
>provide a clue to anyone who has to port the code.  If you are writing
>throw-away code, sticking in the conversions is no big deal.  If the
>code you are writing is going to have to be maintained years from now
>(either by you or someone else) it is probably worth making the 
dependency
>on the character set a little more conspicuous than the C code does.

And if adding explicit type conversions to that simple example is going 
to make it easier to maintain, then you are employing the wrong 
programmers.
>				Kenneth Almquist

-
If at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence that you ever tried. 
<< Iceman >>