Re: why learn C?

[<adaworks@sbcglobal.net>]

"kevin cline" <kevin.cline@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1175230700.925143.28490@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> Ada gives you low-level type safety out of the box, but does not
> afford the tools necessary to achieve type-safety in high-level
> programming.  Low-level C++ coding is not type safe, but C++ provides
> powerful mechanisms to write high-level type-safe code.
>
On reading the Grein paper, it is clear that the advantage is a very
small, and very narrowly focused one.   Any suggestion that C++
is, as a general principle, safer than Ada is simply a fantasy.

Overall, compile-time safety in Ada is substantially superior to that
in C++.    C and C++ are highly error-prone.  Programmers who
choose C++ take for granted that long hours of debugging obscure
errors is the way life ought to be.

As for high-level programming, this is where Ada does excel.   For
large-scale, multi-developer projects C++ simply is a mess.   There
is no dependable model for separate programming.  Oh yes, those
CPP files!  Well, they are inherently part of their own specification
and they need to be augmented by compiler directives just to make
sure there are not errors.

I nearly guffawed when reading your last sentence.  C++ as type
safe?  What a joke.   Sadly, I suspect you actually believe this.

With all mechanisms available in Ada for developing solid, dependable
code and a language definition that focuses on creating compilers that
maximize the amount of error detection that can be done early in
the development process, I wonder whether you really understand
Ada at all.   Have you any understanding of the visbility rules?  This
goes well beyond type-safety.    Do you understand the library model
and how it affects separate compilation?

As for the safety of generics, Grein's paper, which you take delight
in citing, does not discount the fact that most generic constructs
are type-safe at compile time.    Further, getting it right, with C++
templates is no trivial feat either.    There are plenty of opportunities
to create errors in C++ templates.

I have programmed in both languages.  I have taught C++ and I have
taught Ada.   I have colleagues who use both languages who realize
that C++ is far more error-prone than Ada.    While one can get a
good set of working software in C++ using heroic efforts, the chance
of errors in a C++ program is much higher in a corresponding program
written in Ada.   I find it strange that anyone who understands both
languages well would come to any other conclusion.

Richard Riehle