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,
	MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,81cf52699486abe7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Ada95 Strengths/Weaknesses.
Date: 1999/09/28
Message-ID: <7sr7ot$nq9$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 530239536
References: <37EED7B8.245C0054@yukyonline.co.yuky>
 <7smp30$9aa1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <7sp914$ago$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <7spd4c$9ic2@news.cis.okstate.edu>
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x29.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Sep 28 20:17:46 1999 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDrobert_dewar
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I)
Date: 1999-09-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <7spd4c$9ic2@news.cis.okstate.edu>,
  dvdeug@x8b4e53cd. (David Starner) wrote:
> This has nothing to do with what I was talking about. In C++,
I
> can write class BigInt, assign integers to it and pass it to
templates
> expecting numbers. In fact, I can sed s/int/BigInt/g and add
include "bigint.h"
> to the top of all the files, and the programs will run the
same (provided,
> of course, that BigInt follows the same semantics as int.) In
Ada, I can't
> write a template that expects a integer type and pass a BigInt
to it. I
> can't assign to it from universal integer. In Ada, BigInt
can't masquarade
> as a number.

Why not use a private generic type, and pass in a generic
package containing the operators to be used (i.e. the
realization of the signature for the type), seems quite
straightforward. A little more work than in the C++ case,
but you get a lot for this extra work (type safety and the
contract model for generics).


>
> Frankly, for all your scoffing at it, many people like and use
MI. From
> a programmer's prospective, not having MI may be a big
disadvantage.

As I asked before, let's see examples.

> I did point this features out as experimental.

I don't regard it as experimental. It is well defined, fully
standardized, and fairly widely used. I just think that it is
poorly designed that's all.



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.