* Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C?
[not found] ` <01bc94e1$46912100$53aa20cc@default>
@ 1997-07-20 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1997-07-21 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy
1997-07-21 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Heaney @ 1997-07-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <01bc94e1$46912100$53aa20cc@default>, "Douglas A. Gwyn"
<DAGwyn@null.net> wrote:
>By the way, I am not taking sides in the subject debate, other than to
>point out that the choice of language may often be rationally influenced
>by factors other than purely linguistic considerations. For example, Ada
>might be chosen by a DoD embedded systems provider simply because
>getting a waiver is too difficult, while C might be chosen for another
>project
>simply because C compilers and programmers are easier to obtain.
First of all, there is no waiver policy, because there is no mandate. Ada
is a good enough language that it doesn't require one.
Read Emmett Page's Official Letter:
<http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/pol-hist/oasd497.shtml>
Second of all, Ada might be chosen by a DoD embedded systems provider
because the developers think it is the best language for the job, not
because they are required to use Ada (which they aren't). Indeed, many
commercial organizations use Ada, by choice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C?
@ 1997-07-21 0:00 Ell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ell @ 1997-07-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Douglas A. Gwyn (gwyn@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
:
: Matthew Heaney <mheaney@ni.net> wrote in article
: >
: > Nature (interpret that to mean God, if that suits you) has
: > chosen aggregation as the essential means of systems construction.
: I think rather, many natural phenomena are *understood by humans*
: via analysis as aggregative "systems".
I think that aggregation can be shown to exist objectively. Aggregation,
objects, and systems are not simply a matter of human cognition.
: One can identify aspects of
: nature that do not fit that mold,
That doesn't mean aggregation doesn't exist objectively.
: > In spite of what you may have heard, your dishwasher, your car, your
: > watch,
: > and even you are constructed using aggregation. Last time I checked,
: > neither my computer (my little Mac, bless it), nor my stereo, nor my
: > microwave oven were constructed using inheritence - not even (gasp!)
: > multiple inheritence. Say it ain't so, Joe!
But often one or more aspects of one aggregate are passed on to another
aggregate - inheritance.
Elliott
--
"The domain object model is the foundation of OOD."
"We should seek out proven optimal practices and use them."
~~ The writer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C?
[not found] ` <01bc94e1$46912100$53aa20cc@default>
1997-07-20 0:00 ` Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? Matthew Heaney
@ 1997-07-21 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-07-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <01bc94e1$46912100$53aa20cc@default> "Douglas A. Gwyn" <gwyn@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> > In spite of what you may have heard, your dishwasher, your car, your
> watch,
> > and even you are constructed using aggregation. Last time I checked,
> > neither my computer (my little Mac, bless it), nor my stereo, nor my
> > microwave oven were constructed using inheritence - not even (gasp!)
> > multiple inheritence. Say it ain't so, Joe!
>
> That's not at all true. In the course of engineering, there is
> normally a vast amount of inheritance going into systems design.
> What is inherited is often a model for the general class of the
> particular product, and the less original the designer, the more
> this shows. For example, automobiles pretty much all look alike,
> and when a new one is designed they don't really start with a
> totally clean slate. I doubt that assumptions such as "has 4
> wheels" are reexamined; they are merely inherited.
This is _not_ in any way shape or form anything like the sort of
"inheritance" codified and directly expressed in typical OOPLs. What
you mention above is "genealogy style inheritance". So, while there
is definitely truth in what you say, it is irrelevant to the topic at
hand.
/Jon
--
Jon Anthony
OMI, Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately,
Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C?
@ 1997-07-21 0:00 Ell
1997-07-21 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ell @ 1997-07-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Jon S Anthony (jsa@alexandria.organon.com) wrote:
:
: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <gwyn@ix.netcom.com> writes:
: >
: > [Don't know] wrote:
: >
: > > In spite of what you may have heard, your dishwasher, your car, your
: > > watch,
: > > and even you are constructed using aggregation. Last time I checked,
: > > neither my computer (my little Mac, bless it), nor my stereo, nor my
: > > microwave oven were constructed using inheritence - not even (gasp!)
: > > multiple inheritence. Say it ain't so, Joe!
: > That's not at all true. In the course of engineering, there is
: > normally a vast amount of inheritance going into systems design.
: > What is inherited is often a model for the general class of the
: > particular product, and the less original the designer, the more
: > this shows. For example, automobiles pretty much all look alike,
: > and when a new one is designed they don't really start with a
: > totally clean slate. I doubt that assumptions such as "has 4
: > wheels" are reexamined; they are merely inherited.
: This is _not_ in any way shape or form anything like the sort of
: "inheritance" codified and directly expressed in typical OOPLs. What
: you mention above is "genealogy style inheritance". So, while there
: is definitely truth in what you say, it is irrelevant to the topic at
: hand.
I do not see how it's so different. One class inheriting from another is
actually one generalization being inherited from another. In biology it's
not ideas that are inherited, but genes. The notion of passing on is
common to both forms of inheritance.
Elliott
--
"The domain object model is the foundation of OOD."
"We should seek out proven optimal practices and use them."
~~ The writer
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C?
1997-07-21 0:00 Ell
@ 1997-07-21 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jon S Anthony @ 1997-07-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <5r089l$g1i$1@news2.digex.net> ell@access5.digex.net (Ell) writes:
> Jon S Anthony (jsa@alexandria.organon.com) wrote:
...
> : This is _not_ in any way shape or form anything like the sort of
> : "inheritance" codified and directly expressed in typical OOPLs. What
> : you mention above is "genealogy style inheritance". So, while there
> : is definitely truth in what you say, it is irrelevant to the topic at
> : hand.
>
> I do not see how it's so different.
Somehow I don't find that surprising...
> One class inheriting from another is actually one generalization
> being inherited from another. In biology it's not ideas that are
> inherited, but genes. The notion of passing on is common to both
> forms of inheritance.
The semantics of the information "transfer" and even what is
"transfered are totally different.
/Jon
--
Jon Anthony
OMI, Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately,
Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C?
1997-07-20 0:00 ` Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? Matthew Heaney
@ 1997-07-21 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Dennis Weldy @ 1997-07-21 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Thats not quite correct. There WAS a mandate, and you DID have to get a
waiver to use non-ada code.
When I was working for a defense contractor on a network-simulation
project, we had to get a waiver because the proect was not going to be done
in Ada,rather, Pascal.
Recently, they've done away with the mandates and waivers, but they existed
for a long time.
Dennis
Matthew Heaney wrote in article ...
>In article <01bc94e1$46912100$53aa20cc@default>, "Douglas A. Gwyn"
><DAGwyn@null.net> wrote:
>
>>By the way, I am not taking sides in the subject debate, other than to
>>point out that the choice of language may often be rationally influenced
>>by factors other than purely linguistic considerations. For example,
Ada
>>might be chosen by a DoD embedded systems provider simply because
>>getting a waiver is too difficult, while C might be chosen for another
>>project
>>simply because C compilers and programmers are easier to obtain.
>
>First of all, there is no waiver policy, because there is no mandate.
Ada
>is a good enough language that it doesn't require one.
>
>Read Emmett Page's Official Letter:
>
><http://sw-eng.falls-church.va.us/AdaIC/pol-hist/oasd497.shtml>
>
>Second of all, Ada might be chosen by a DoD embedded systems provider
>because the developers think it is the best language for the job, not
>because they are required to use Ada (which they aren't). Indeed, many
>commercial organizations use Ada, by choice.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Matthew Heaney
>Software Development Consultant
><mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
>(818) 985-1271
>.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1997-07-21 0:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1997-07-21 0:00 Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? Ell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1997-07-21 0:00 Ell
1997-07-21 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
1997-07-15 0:00 Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? (WAS: Re: Avoiding the second historic mistake) Matthew Heaney
1997-07-16 0:00 ` Don Harrison
1997-07-17 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
[not found] ` <01bc94e1$46912100$53aa20cc@default>
1997-07-20 0:00 ` Is ADA as good for graphics programming as C? Matthew Heaney
1997-07-21 0:00 ` Dennis Weldy
1997-07-21 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox