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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-01 20:30:54 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Reply-To: "James S. Rogers" From: "James S. Rogers" Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc References: <9fa75d42.0304230424.10612b1a@posting.google.com> <3EA7E0E3.8020407@crs4.it> <9fa75d42.0304240950.45114a39@posting.google.com> <4a885870.0304291909.300765f@posting.google.com> <416273D61ACF7FEF.82C1D1AC17296926.FF0BFD4934A03813@lp.airnews.net> <9fa75d42.0305010621.55e99deb@posting.google.com> <254c16a.0305011035.13133e8d@posting.google.com> <9fa75d42.0305011727.5eae0222@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 03:30:54 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.86.36.216 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1051846254 12.86.36.216 (Fri, 02 May 2003 03:30:54 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 03:30:54 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63023 comp.object:62519 comp.lang.ada:36834 misc.misc:13885 Date: 2003-05-02T03:30:54+00:00 List-Id: "soft-eng" wrote in message news:9fa75d42.0305011727.5eae0222@posting.google.com... > mcq95@earthlink.net (Marc A. Criley) wrote in message news:<254c16a.0305011035.13133e8d@posting.google.com>... > > Yes, Ada extended Pascal very strongly in this regards, > without any particular consideration of how useful > these extensions would actually turn out to be. Nonsense. The Ada designers knew very well how useful those extensions would turn out to be. After all, Ada was not designed by a committee. > Like I said, Ada has amazing amounts of itsy-bitsy stuff. > Now which of these features, if missing, would take you > more than a minor effort to provide yourself? If and > when necessary, rather than present by default all the time? So, are you arguing against the sizeof operator in C and C++? Are you arguing against the Length field of an Java array? Are you arguing against C pointer arithmetic? What feature of a high level language cannot be created with an individual effort from an assembler programmer? > You misunderstand. Nobody needs to "work around" the type-safety > of C++ or Java. Though this was a problem with Pascal, which > was the premier contender at one time. The need to "work around" > Pascal's type safety was a big problem, and that helped C become > much more popular. Ada didn't just inherit Pascal's problems, > it enthusiastically extended them. Absolutely wrong. Ada did not extend Pascal. It simply belongs to the same syntax family, which is not rooted in Pascal. Algol came long before Pascal. The Ada type system is both stronger than the Pascal type system and more flexible. It is designed to do its work and keep out of your way. > > The type safety in C++ and therefore in Java has evolved slowly > and naturally. There is nothing natural about the development of a language. Classes belonged to C++ from the very beginning. The same is true of Java. Those languages are not evolutionary developments. They were discrete attempts to create languages in the B (yes, the precursor to C) family with stronger typing and greater support for Object Oriented Programming than exist in C. Java is not an evolved C++. The design goals of the two languages are far different. C++, despite its name, is not merely a superset of C. If it were the C++ standard would need to subsume the C standard. It does not. The C++ standard exists independent of the C standard. Your basic assumptions are invalid. This forces your conclusions to be invalid also. Jim Rogers