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: 103376,897417b380f5731e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: STL, Ada, C++ (Was Re: The Next Microsoft?)
Date: 2000/05/08
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005081534330.24665-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 620864093
References: <8eg37k$15n$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8epkoa$b8b$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <E$OcUgAHHIE5Ewfl@quik.freeuk.net> <8eu0ob$7qv$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <u4s8dosyz.fsf@infomatch.com> <m3hfcdvsg6.fsf@flash.localdomain>
 <t7zoq4c3ud.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com> <m3d7n0x4nc.fsf@flash.localdomain>
 <t7vh0sbzrz.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com> <391328F0.1221@synquiry.com>
 <t7n1m4bve7.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com> <39133213.64A@Ganymede.com>
 <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005071606250.9268-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>
 <8f50hc$hpo$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <t7og6gahgm.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Trace: nntp1.ba.best.com 957825938 220 bpr@206.184.139.136
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 2000-05-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 8 May 2000, Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> writes:
> > I am not at all convinced that automatic instantiation is
> > a help to the reader and maintainer, on the contrary, it
> > seems very awkward to have uses of templates not be visible
> > from this point of view.
> 
> I consider automatic instantiation of templates to be the compile-time
> polymorphism equivalent of run-time dispatching on class-wide types.

Correct, and type theorists refer to this as "parametric polymorphism". 
Ada doesn't really have parametric polymorphism, it's generics are really 
monomorphic. 

> When you make a dispatching call, you do not know what function you
> are calling. Similarly, you should be able to call a generic function
> without explicitly stating which one you are calling.

This is one good way to look at it, since dispatching is sometimes a 
negative with respect to readability and maintainability. It is also 
similar to overloading; if you have several overloaded functions in scope 
you don't explicitly say which you are calling in Ada or C++. In languages 
without overloading you have to use qualified names. 

As much as I like Ada, this is one thing I really prefer about the C++
design. This discussion might be more interesting with specific examples,
so I'll put some together in an Ada-like language with automatic
instantiation. Shen and Cormack's paper from Tri-Ada 91 is a good place to 
start for anyone interested.

-- Brian