Re: Ada/Java

[tmoran@bix.com]

> > > >   Must each record be a class?  Not all Ada records are tagged types.
> > >
> > > Java does not support any other kind of first class object which has
> > > structure.
> >   So, at the Jave byte code level there is no structure larger than
> > "words"?
>
> You've lost me.  The basic point is that you want your Ada to fit in
> as transparently as possible with any stuff generated from Java (the
> language).

Consider two ways of making a Point
  type Coordinates is (X,Y);
  type Point is array(Coordinates) of Integer;
vs
  type Point is record
    X : Integer;
    Y : Integer;
  end record;

If I write "Starting_Point(X) := 0;" for the first, or
"Starting_Point.X := 0;" for the second, I would expect rather similar
instructions to be generated at the (virtual) machine code level.  But
in Jave these are very different - the second (record) approach apparently
requires a whole additional file.  My question is "why can't the compiler
recognize that the record approach is similar to the array approach and
use the much less expensive array style?".  I gather the answer is that
the Java byte code for some reason does not allow this.