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
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!sdcsvax!ucbvax!VLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV!larry
From: larry@VLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Ada++ & Objective-Ada
Message-ID: <871231191213.05i@VLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Date: 1 Jan 88 03:12:12 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

--
If pre-processors or translators can be written for C to produce object-
oriented languages, then the same ought to be possible for Ada.  Has (is) 
anyone done this?  What are the advantages and problems?

I can see at least two problems for users.  Debugging of programs produced 
by anything other than a compiler means your
you're looking at "ugly Ada" rather than the "super Ada" of 
Objective-Ada/Ada++.  This was one reason RatFor and company never caught 
on widely.

Also, standardization might suffer.  I suspect, however, that the various 
super-Adas would be used only in experiments, and that useful features 
would eventually find their way into Ada-1993.
                                                    Larry @ jpl-vlsi