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,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a6fe9ef21ba269dc
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!k10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Warren <ve3wwg@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada Smileys in C++ lib Conversion
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 18:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <b05a83d9-fac1-45cb-91c5-f99516ca27f2@k10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <1a9b39b0-73f6-497c-a8f4-abf8129886ac@t20g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
 <9b88e5a4-c588-4997-ad5c-2efa216fe4f4@a4g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.121.235.102
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1281749798 24070 127.0.0.1 (14 Aug 2010 01:36:38
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 01:36:38 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: k10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=216.121.235.102;
 posting-account=ENgozAkAAACH-stq5yXctoDQeZQP2E6J
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.8)
 Gecko/20100722 Firefox/3.6.8 ( .NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe)
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:13263
Date: 2010-08-13T18:36:38-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Aug 13, 12:53=A0pm, Anh Vo <anhvofrc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 13, 7:20=A0am, Warren <ve3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > it immediately identified the value MC_CTL_LOCAL_C
> > (and others) as not fitting into the Control_Type's
> > valid range. In C++ a glaring error had gone
> > unnoticed:
> [...]
> > I'm always smiling when I convert code from C/C++ to
> > Ada. In code of any significant size, Ada always
> > discovers problems that went unnoticed in C/C++.
>
> I am smiling, too, since I am not surprised at all. When someone asks
> me what difference between computer languages especially between Ada
> and C/C++, I tell him Ada has 75% check at compile time and 25% and
> runtime while C/C++ in reverse.
>
> Anh Vo

Heh heh. This is one of those things that C/C++ cannot
guard against at all. Unless the value(s) were to exceed
the underlying type's storage capability, the compiler
is helpless to identify it. There is simply no concept of
a "range" of valid values in that language.

About the only thing you could do (in C/C++) is to code
a macro check on the constants, but I don't think I've
ever seen it done in practice.  Only as a argument value
assertion check in strategic places.

But if you leave it up to programmers coding assertions,
then you know they won't exist everywhere they're needed.

Warren