From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 5 Dec 92 00:15:30 GMT From: cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!csn!yuma!yuma.acns.colostate .edu!olender@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Kurt Olender) Subject: Re: C++ vs. Ada -- Is Ada loosing? Message-ID: List-Id: srheintze@happy.colorado.edu writes: ... stuff deleted ... HOWEVER, please read "A dynamic Vector is harder than it looks" from the June 1992 is issue of JOOP (Journal of Object Oriented Programming) - vol 5 no 4. *THIS ARTICLE IS SCARY* Basically Tom Cargill pointed out a bug that nearly all C++ textbooks have made when they implement a dynamically sized array. This includes the textbook written by the implementor of the AT&T Cfront compiler (will I get in trouble if I mention his name?). If the language is so convoluted that even the experts (including the compiler writers) cannot get their simple textbook examples correct, then I conclude there is something drastically wrong with the language. Well, without making any statements about the relative merits of Ada and C++, I don't think you can make much real hay out of this fact. After all, legend has it that that it was 10 years from the first publication of a binary search algorithm to the first publication of a correct binary search algorithm. Perhaps it only says that we're not really good at these things, until we've done them a few (dozens, hundreds, thousands?) of times.