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: 103376,2702c1ed8be62863 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Gautier.DeMontmollin@maths.unine.ch Subject: Re: What ada 83 compiler is *best* Date: 1998/12/08 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 420008006 References: <3666F5A4.2CCF6592@maths.unine.ch> Organization: University of Neuchatel, Switzerland Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-12-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: [about McDo etc.] > Ada and C++/Java operate in the same domain. They're all used for large > system development, real-time processing, applications development, etc. They may have domains in common. > Which you choose depends on the development environment you want. If you > want to get close to the machine and control the memory usage, us C++ > because it provides incredible memory allocation capabilities. Incredible but not portable (including with the same compiler on the same machine if you change memory model). It's a general problem with macro-assemblers. > If you > want simplicity in memory allocation and want enourmous flexibility in > portability and UI development, use Java. Or Ada. Recent experience: a port from Ada83 on a platform to Ada95 on another of a commercial n*100_000 lines program - tens of packages - needed to change 5 lines (usage of Ada95 math libs). Can you so easily port Java to another compiler and platform (real question! I'm interested in a serious answer) ? > If you really don't care about > performance or vendor support and want to comply with obscure and obsolete > government standards, use Ada. Your call. Did you try to compare an Ada project compiled by GNAT with cross-package inlining on, suppress_all, -O2 options, with its C++ counterpart where *.o files are just linked together ? Again a serious comparision would be welcome! [about government, DoD, bureaucrats, other baddies] Old story! Are the C++ or Java specifications less bureaucratic ? Was Ada invented by DoD bureaucrats ? >> - the most bugs are found at compile time in Ada (a fraction of a second) and >> during debugging sessions in Fortran, C, C++ (it may take hours); > Can you possibly be implying that C++/C compilers don't find bugs, and the > Ada somehow produces code without runtime errors by virtue of superior > compiler technology? I don't. But a good usage of strong typing and subtypes I catch range errors even at compile time, which, accepted by other languages would sum up to _months_ of debugging (in my current project) - not to speak about languages which don't differentiate integers and pointers... > To make the statement that Ada compilers - by definition and/or > technological superiority - make Ada a virtual bug-free language is simply > ludicrous. virtual bug-free: no; real few-bugs: yes. >> - an Ada source is easy to read. > Again, puh-lease. Some of the worst code I've ever seen is Ada code. Was it yours ;-) ? At least it indicates it was readable enough to allow you to _see_ it was bad code ! There are competitions to determine what some C expressions could _mean_ ! (.......) > Ada is just a programming language. Really ? Won't it program for you ? > Languages are NOT > at the heart of the software engineering crisis. They are peripheral > co-conspirators at best. Of course the main problem is human. But I'm afraid you're underestimating the co-conspirators! (.......) Why don't you want to accept that people find they might be more efficient by programming in some language instead of another ? Or even enjoy programming in that language ! Happy Christmas meal at Le Papillon and don't get so nervous about these programming languages wars! -- Gautier