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: fd6dd,c78177ec2e61f4ac
X-Google-Attributes: gidfd6dd,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c78177ec2e61f4ac
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: ada and robots
Date: 1997/06/17
Message-ID: <EBxtpL.9ML@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 249189847
References: <338CDA96.53EA@halcyon.com> <dewar.866044546@merv>
 <33A5D644.37A3@epix.net> <33A69E46.3230@gsfc.nasa.gov>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Newsgroups: comp.robotics.misc,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <33A69E46.3230@gsfc.nasa.gov>,
Stephen Leake  <Stephen.Leake@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
>This is true. The reason is type safety and run-time simplicity. When
>porting GCC to a new processor, one of my biggest problems was getting
>variable arguments working; I'm still finding bugs related to this! But
>even given a correct implementation, variable argument lists are just
>not type safe. Ada provides alternatives that are safe (see MyType
>above).

Variable-length argument lists are not *inherently* un-type-safe.  They
are so in C.  But I can imagine a language in which they are type safe.

Ada doesn't have them because it would complicate the language.

- Bob