Re: 'Cyclone', a safer C--reinventing the wheel

["Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org>]

And of course those of us who have been around Ada for a while remember all
the criticisms of Ada tasking by the C/C++ crowd - how its totally useless,
way too slow, contributes to code bloat, etc., and why did you need it if
you could make perfectly good fork calls to an OS? (Hey! Wait a minute! I've
got this great idea how we could extend C++. Its this new concept I just now
invented called "Constraint Checking" where you can create a numeric type
that has limits on the values it can take... :-)

I suppose we should be happy that the C/C++ crowd is coming around to seeing
the wisdom of having things that Ada has had all along - and its probably
too much to expect that an apology be issued - but it continues to raise the
question: "Why not just use Ada and be done with it?"

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Jeffrey Carter" <jeffrey.carter@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:3BFAD75A.C964DE1C@boeing.com...
>
> That is not the impression I got from this post. Rather, it was, "How
> can they claim this is new when Ada has had it since Ada-80?"
>
> It reminds me more of reactions to an article a few years ago (sorry, no
> reference right now) on adding concurrency to C++ that was obviously an
> implementation of Ada-83 tasking in C++ terms, even using "entry",
> "accept", "select", "rendezvous", and so on, but that made no mention or
> reference to Ada, instead presenting the ideas as new and original with
> the author.
>