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-Thread: 103376,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 109fba,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: f43e6,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid109fba,gid115aec,gidf43e6,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!news.glorb.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!trndny01.POSTED!0e8a908a!not-for-mail From: Hyman Rosen User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) References: <4229bad9$0$1019$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <1110032222.447846.167060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org> <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk> <87r7iu85lf.fsf@insalien.org> <1110052142.832650@athnrd02> <1110284070.410136.205090@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <395uqaF5rhu2mU1@individual.net> <1111607633.301232.62490@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> <1111628011.160315.134740@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <1111732101.995662.309040@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 21:33:36 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.161.96.72 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net X-Trace: trndny01 1111786416 68.161.96.72 (Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:33:36 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 16:33:36 EST Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9999 comp.lang.c++:47288 comp.realtime:1726 comp.software-eng:5343 Date: 2005-03-25T21:33:36+00:00 List-Id: Dr. Adrian Wrigley wrote: > Or to put it another way: > How come "more expressive" templates, "better exception handling", > or "less verbose" syntax is not claimed to improve project success? > Maybe I (still) don't get it. To claim improved project success, you have to do some pretty difficult basic research. Most of us here are programmers, not software engineering researchers, so most of us at best have only anecdotal evidence. Therefore when we compare languages we do so from the basis of things that affect us as programmers.