Re: point by point advantages of Ada

[Wes Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com>]

>> by a large number of enthusiastic users throwing in every
>> 'kitchen-sink' feature that suited their fancy.
> 
> Or by a bunch of people asking Bjarne Stroustrup to add features.

Same difference.  He could work for Toyota: "You asked for it--you got it!"

Ada 95 has been accused of that--BUT Ada 95 had
(plug your ears!) a _committee_ that kept out
at least some of the cruft.

Now, I do not know Bjarne Stroustrup personally,
so it's entirely possible he rejected lots of cruft.
But looking at C++, it sure looks like a poorly integrated
mass of not-always-related features.  (Disclaimer: spoken
by someone who has only debugged, not written C++)

> compiler. It takes a very close reading of the standard to figure some
> of these out, so without code that tries to use these features, it's
> possible for compiler writers to not even know that they exist.

OK, I'll grant you that.  Why should a compiler writer
waste time reading the standard when application coders
will do it for him?