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
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,6960ceaa57428e2f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: pete@nospam <pete_member@newsguy.com>
Subject: Re: Another important feature of Ada
Date: 2000/11/18
Message-ID: <8v78bm01p5t@drn.newsguy.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 695267913
References: <3A12041B.BCFD8CA0@worldnet.att.net> <8uu6tf$63d$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <3A12BBC6.E3FDAB0F@averstar.com> <PM000376263FFF6F15@Dogen.ne.mediaone.net>
 <8v5dkm$ftt$1@wanadoo.fr> <PM0003765BB967CEAE@Dogen.ne.mediaone.net>
Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com]
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-11-18T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <PM0003765BB967CEAE@Dogen.ne.mediaone.net>, Ed says...
 
>
>I agree with your point about the value of being able to compile against
>unimplemented specs - it's always been one of my favorite aspects of
>Ada.  But the same effect can be achieved otherwise.
 
not sure that compiling against unimplemented specs is that important.
after all, you are just checking compiler syntax errors, and checking
against any mismatched types. And you can do that in almost any
other language. In Java for example using interfaces, and in C++ using
pure virtual functions.

And in practice, it is only after running the program against the
actual implementation that one finds for sure if the interface is 
the right one, also many times the interface is changed as development 
goes on.