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=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,971aa11c293c3db1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-20 11:13:19 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!193.251.151.101!opentransit.net!wanadoo.fr!not-for-mail
From: "Bertrand Augereau" <baugereau@ifrance.kom>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada The Best Language?
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 20:18:32 +0200
Organization: Wanadoo, l'internet avec France Telecom
Message-ID: <9j9sbu$9ak$1@wanadoo.fr>
References: <3B59CD72@MailAndNews.com> <3B5573DA.5ABA8EA7@earthlink.net>
 <9j94gj$1uk6$1@norfair.nerim.net> <3B581E6B.6FB1DAEF@earthlink.net>
 <9j9cip$238u$1@norfair.nerim.net> <3B585BBA.7C4BBA3D@earthlink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: afontenayssb-103-1-3-242.abo.wanadoo.fr
X-Trace: wanadoo.fr 995652798 9556 217.128.201.242 (20 Jul 2001 18:13:18 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@wanadoo.fr
NNTP-Posting-Date: 20 Jul 2001 18:13:18 GMT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10366
Date: 2001-07-20T18:13:18+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> > That's right it's not as much automated as in Ada (anyway there's no
value
> > range in C++), it is merely a "technique", but you can do really nice
stuff
> > with this.
>
> Well sure!  But when comparing programming language capabilities you
> don't normally compare a language's intrinsic features with something
> the developer would have to write themself.

Yes but available idioms are dependant of the features of the language and
they are just as important, I feel.

>
> > If you only use some subset of C++ features, everybody support these.
Maybe
> > that's why your "C++ experts" buddies don't use that, or because it
wasn't
> > popular (it's still not in fact) at this time.
>
> You needn't enclose "C++ experts" in quotes.  These individuals created
> some of the most sophisticated (in the good sense), powerful, and
> elegant software I have seen in _any_ programming language.  They knew
> C++ through and through.

Sorry, it was not what the quotes intended.

> "Traits" is just not a well-known technique for C++, while attributes
> are widely used in Ada code.

Agreed. That's because most C++ people don't bother using any feature if
they don't badly need it.