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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	FREEMAIL_REPLY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,912597791e813f68
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-05 03:49:03 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!newsrouter.chello.at!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.com!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: "karl bowl" <karl.bowl@gmx.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: advantages or disadvantages of ADA over pascal or modula
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2003 12:47:05 +0100
Organization: T-Online
Message-ID: <av962p$vjj$03$1@news.t-online.com>
References: <av4c0m$8a4$06$1@news.t-online.com> <3E171612.E4E2972@t-online.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1041767323 03 32371 1TtCEz5XSpY1-m 030105 11:48:43
X-Complaints-To: abuse@t-online.com
X-Sender: 320060560190-0001@t-dialin.net
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32566
Date: 2003-01-05T12:47:05+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Alfred Hilscher" <Alfred.Hilscher@t-online.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:3E171612.E4E2972@t-online.de...
>
>
> Compared to Modula-2 I see the following disadvantages:
>
> - No equivalent to the "WITH" from Modula (Adas "with" has a totally
> different meaning). This often produces long and bad readable code.
>
> - No construct like Modulas "ARRAY OF BYTE" parameter that catches up
> _all_ parameters.
>
> - No _real_ hidden export. You can define types to be "private" in your
> spec, but if you want change the definition (let's say from a pointer to
> a four byte hash key), you have to change the package spec (= DEFINITION
> MODULE) and then recompile _all_ importing modules (although it's only
> an internal change to your implementation).
>
> - No equivalent to the "final" from Java. So even if you made your
> definition "private" everyone is allowed to declare a child package
> which then can access this data.
>
>
> And mostly the Ada-Compilers generate bigger exe-files than
> Modula-compilers do.

Assume you have to design an embedded sytem, for instance a
movementcontroller for a vehicle. In this way you have to decide for a
programming language. Would you prefer Modula2 or Ada95 or anything else?

Nic