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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,56131a5c3acc678e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-07 19:46:56 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!news-out.visi.com!petbe.visi.com!news-out1.nntp.be!propagator2-sterling!news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!nwrdny01.gnilink.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: Hyman Rosen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031008 Thunderbird/0.3 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Question about OO programming in Ada References: <5JmdnUF_9o_ABE-iRTvUrg@rapidnet.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 03:46:55 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.84.211.17 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: nwrdny01.gnilink.net 1070855215 162.84.211.17 (Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:46:55 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:46:55 EST Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3214 Date: 2003-12-08T03:46:55+00:00 List-Id: James Rogers wrote: > Is this done using templates? Templates do incur an overhead. The > overhead is incurred at compile time rather than at run time, but > there is still an overhead. What does it mean to incur a compile-time overhead? > While speaking of C++ templates, I am amazed at the power and limitations > of C++ templates. The language for C++ templates appears to me to be > an additional syntax beyond the C++ run time syntax. Yes. C++ templates in themselves form a Turing-complete programming language, executed within the compiler, in functional programming style.