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: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-11 19:08:01 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!pd7cy1no!pd7cy2so!shaw.ca!border1.nntp.ash.giganews.com!border2.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.adelphia.com!news.adelphia.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 21:05:58 -0600 From: Jerry Coffin Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:12:55 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org> <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com> <2460735.u7KiuvdgQP@linux1.krischik.com> <54759e7e.0402081525.50c7adae@posting.google.com> Organization: TAEUS X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.64.173.106 X-Trace: sv3-2loa1/HcfLjYj0MTsCNoDz1jW+ag0IHTEx26AeTtVrgDB5di2VKQhWYeww4sddURrbyDVSzw3UTFbKk!8+27d+/KNst897MeynPL8i+6aI13iybYpCpDGw7i+Rkv3CinhUBrSmyVIONnngQ/+x8xASWZDdSe!oHhyJ7SMjLG7wVjQEBl3PyM= X-Complaints-To: abuse@adelphia.com X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@adelphia.com X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5471 comp.lang.c++:18789 Date: 2004-02-11T20:12:55-07:00 List-Id: In article , martin.dowie@btopenworld.com says... [ ... ] > > A fundamental mistake: assuming that one compiler's inferiority means > > something about the language itself, or even about other compilers. > > That's all well and good but where in the C standard is it required to > produce a warning? It's not -- in some ideal world, it might be that there's a programming language implementation that warns you every time you do something wrong, but it certainly doesn't exist in this world. I, however, never claimed that the situation with this in C was ideal by any means. He claimed that because it wasn't caught by one compiler, that this proved it could only ever be caught by human examination. I proved that wrong. > .. That's the bottom line - what one language throws > out as an error, another may say nothing and then the user is left to the > vagaries of what a particular vendor offers. Rarely true and irrelevant on the rare occasion that it is. Comparing the languages only makes sense when both are available for the target platform. If a particular target is so obscure that it truly leaves to the vagaries of a particular vendor (i.e. there's only one C compiler for it) then there's basically no chance of finding even one Ada compiler for the platform. As such, Ada is useless relative to that platform, regardless of how much merit it might have in theory. -- Later, Jerry. The universe is a figment of its own imagination.