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,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/01/25 Message-ID: <78gok5$pmc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 436515069 References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <782r25$k18$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <787f4b$jl9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <78g0oj$8sb$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x9.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Jan 25 03:32:21 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.vxworks,comp.realtime X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-01-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , gwinn@ma.ultranet.com (Joe Gwinn) wrote: > The evidence is what it is, and we cannot do much about > it, fifteen year later. meaningless evidence involving a useless comparison is not interesting now or 15 years ago. > > > > You have gnu C, C++ and gnat at your fingertips. > > > What do > > > the various components weigh? > > > > It is not something I would spend 30 seconds looking > > at, because the answer to this question would convey > > little of value! > > If perfect metric existed, we would use them. Absent > perfection, we use what's avaialble. Please don't use *we* here. You may be happy to produce completely meaningless data that is almost certain to mislead, but I won't participate in this unscientific excercise. > I take it the answer isn't to Ada's perceived > advantage. Not at all, it is just that the result is meaningless. Anyone perceiving an advantage or disadvantage in such comparisons is making the same mistake you make of putting credance in useless comparisons. > > > 3. Ada83 versus K&R C? Ada83 is a factor more > > > complex, by all metrics, than K&R C, by universal > > >experience. > > > > Since this seems to be your most obvious case for > > expecting > > an unconditional yes vote, I will choose this one to > > illustrate. > > Yep. OK. > > > First of all K&R C is ill defined. Lack of definition > > results in a lot of uncertainty of semantic details, > > and this kind of uncertainty leads to significant > > complexity: > > We already agreed that Ada83 is better defined than K&R > C, so further discussion of that is beside the point. > Please answer the original question, yes or no. Please don't obfuscate with silly lawyer talk. The whole point of my argument which you don't seem to understand at all, but I trust others do is that this is NOT a yes/no question! > <> > > Has anyone written such an informal description of Ada83 > as well? I never saw such a description, simple yet > possible to program from, and one has > to wonder if it's possible to write such a thing. One does not have to wonder there are several elementary Ada texts around! -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own