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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a6b:ac42:: with SMTP id v63-v6mr2503295ioe.103.1530118243513; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 09:50:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:296a:: with SMTP id d97-v6mr382820otb.1.1530118243328; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 09:50:43 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!85.12.16.69.MISMATCH!peer02.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer02.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!d7-v6no1974785itj.0!news-out.google.com!p13-v6ni2471itf.0!nntp.google.com!u78-v6no1955388itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 09:50:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <0de140f5-9092-4012-b57b-64a7e306786d@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=47.185.195.62; posting-account=zwxLlwoAAAChLBU7oraRzNDnqQYkYbpo NNTP-Posting-Host: 47.185.195.62 References: <584564c2-9f64-4965-b045-535cdaf899c0@googlegroups.com> <7cb22c58-3009-47f0-8fe7-62f3cd61785d@googlegroups.com> <1879145989.551211041.811077.laguest-archeia.com@nntp.aioe.org> <06e9a2de-7d05-41ce-a459-c39855d429fd@googlegroups.com> <25267926-202c-4ae3-821a-097c1c27697a@googlegroups.com> <1e96b53e-b66c-49da-9c9d-5e99dbd2b505@googlegroups.com> <0de140f5-9092-4012-b57b-64a7e306786d@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <758b6ade-5303-46ff-be52-9d96c6b1f480@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Why are Ada compilers difficult to write ? From: "Dan'l Miller" Injection-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:50:43 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 3088 X-Received-Body-CRC: 323918782 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53384 Date: 2018-06-27T09:50:43-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, June 27, 2018 at 11:26:56 AM UTC-5, Olivier Henley wrote: > You literally bumped the previous comment over planned features. From now= on, please save me of such > technical diversions. >=20 > He is right, "you can=E2=80=99t compare Ada=E2=80=99s high level tasking = to the thin veneer over threading that=E2=80=99s in C++".=20 >=20 > The key here, FYI, is "that's in C++" as in --> common sense "usable" <--= , not "to come in C++". Rust is close to surpassing Ada as the safe-systems language (unless Ada202= 0 adopts Rust-esque safe-pointers and safe-threading). Go thinks that it i= s too, but I cannot see any clear features of Go that substantiates Go's cl= aim. C++ is close to surpassing Ada as the programming language with gener= ous amounts of concurrency built =E2=80=A2directly=E2=80=A2 into the langua= ge, not such rinkydink library wrappers as it was formerly. Wake up. The acquire-release fences of the memory model alone in C++11 (7 years ago = for those keeping count) is a major concurrency language feature that is fa= r beyond mere =E2=80=9Cthin veneer over threading=E2=80=9D. Extant in Cla= ng 3.3 and onward. Extant in GCC 4.8 and onward. Ancient history nowadays= , not vaporware as you claim.=20 blog posts from 2016, not from 2021 as you claim: http://www.modernescpp.com/index.php/category/multithreading-memory-model