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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,66253344eaef63db X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,66253344eaef63db X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,66253344eaef63db X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-10-15 16:57:32 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!MathWorks.Com!yeshua.marcam.com!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!csusac!csus.edu!netcom.com!netcomsv!netcomsv!annwfn!annwfn!merlin From: merlin@annwfn.com (Fred McCall) Subject: Re: Mut. Recurs. in Ada9X w/o Breaking Encapsulation? Date: Sat, 15 Oct 1994 10:24:35 -0400 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.object Message-ID: <85CF23BD4DE@annwfn.com> References: <1994Oct8.135052.10923@inca.comlab.ox.ac.uk> Organization: Is For People Who Don't Have Real Work X-Newsreader: Newsy 0.23 Xref: bga.com comp.lang.ada:6954 comp.lang.c++:32927 comp.object:7395 Date: 1994-10-15T10:24:35-04:00 List-Id: In <1994Oct8.135052.10923@inca.comlab.ox.ac.uk> lady0065@sable.ox.ac.uk David J Hopwood writes: >Absolutely right. The difference between C++ and Ada9X in this case is that >Ada9X has separate compilation, and C++ doesn't. Since when? Every C++ compiler I've ever used had separate compilation. Perhaps you've redefined the word since I went to school? -- "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden --------------------------------------------------------------------------- merlin@annwfn.com -- I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.