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:a02:c5:: with SMTP id 188-v6mr6241767jaa.15.1530291738217; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 10:02:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:c6ca:: with SMTP id w193-v6mr1328932oif.1.1530291738056; Fri, 29 Jun 2018 10:02:18 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.snarked.org!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!d7-v6no637439itj.0!news-out.google.com!p13-v6ni1006itf.0!nntp.google.com!d7-v6no637438itj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 10:02:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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> <758b6ade-5303-46ff-be52-9d96c6b1f480@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <85a28725-aeaa-4818-87a4-3bc5cf954627@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Why are Ada compilers difficult to write ? From: "Dan'l Miller" Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 17:02:18 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53435 Date: 2018-06-29T10:02:17-07:00 List-Id: On Friday, June 29, 2018 at 11:36:07 AM UTC-5, G. B. wrote: > Dan'l Miller wrote: > > C++ is close to surpassing Ada as the programming language with generou= s > > 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. > > >=20 > Also, cleverly the language seems to continue its tradition of playing in= to > the hands of programmers who enjoy building a multitasking solution rathe= r > than using one. Very astute observation. Perhaps the Ada community can utilize this as a d= ifferentiator/path-to-victory in the forthcoming explanations'/articles'/bo= oks'/bake-off-competitions' battle of the minds for mindshare. One of the weak links in the chain of C++'s forthcoming new era of concurre= ncy in the language is how precisely it fits with each OS's differing exist= ing practices. Programmers go through crawl, walk, run phases of utilizing= new tech. At the =E2=80=98crawl=E2=80=99 level, C++'s new threads support= and multireader-uniwriter locks are obviously mapped to POSIX equivalents.= But on the other =E2=80=98walk=E2=80=99/=E2=80=98run=E2=80=99 extreme, it= is not clear at all how all of C++'s new concurrency-in-the-language featu= res fully map onto, say, Apple's Grand Central Dispatch concurrency, if at = all. I predict (as G.B. seems to, as well) that C++'s roll-your-own approa= ch is going to get overwhelming for the average programmer to get entirely = correct in anything other than the plain-vanilla cases at the =E2=80=98craw= l=E2=80=99 stage.