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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a270a1fc28d4f812
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-22 20:33:20 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: nma124@hotmail.com (steve_H)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: OOD in Ada?
Date: 22 Jun 2002 20:33:20 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <8db3d6c8.0206221933.496d3904@posting.google.com>
References: <3d135676$0$8511$cc9e4d1f@news.dial.pipex.com>
 <3D1440FA.9030409@ib-paus.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.101.234.30
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1024803200 626 127.0.0.1 (23 Jun 2002 03:33:20
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Jun 2002 03:33:20 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26612
Date: 2002-06-23T03:33:20+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Dr. Michael Paus" <paus@ib-paus.com> wrote in message news:<3D1440FA.9030409@ib-paus.com>...
 
> 
> > 2. The lack of a "dot" notation (or anything similar) for calling a member
> > method, making the code hard to read and hard to determine where dynamic
> > binding may be taking place.
>
 
> This is indeed one of the more serious problems. 

I wish someone would create a new language just like Ada in everything, 
except the OO uses the normal 'class' construct as in Java and C++.

I think the main reason why Ada is not too popular is that its OO constructs
are not the norm, they do not look like what almost every programmer from
other languages is used to looking at.

It seems it should not be too hard for some language design expert to
design such a language. Or is there is anything out there that looks like
Ada, but with the 'class' for OO? Modula3 may be?