Re: C vs. Ada - strings

[dale <dale@cs.rmit.edu.au>]

Robert A Duff wrote:

> > Yes, but with this simplicity you get a very real problem - the
> > inability to define new distinct numeric types.
> 
> I don't agree.  It's quite easy to design a language in which it is
> possible to define convenient output procedures, and still have multiple
> user-defined integer types.  And I don't mean by making all the output
> primitives built-in, either (as in Pascal) -- I/O should be done in
> library packages, not as built-in primitives.

I was really just restricting myself to commenting on Java, rather than
making a more generalised statment on language design (i.e. _if_ you 
choose Java, you don't get to define distinct numeric types).
I hadn't thought about getting I/O "for free" (i.e. no instantiation)
in a language which permitted multiple distinct integer types (I presume
this is what you are saying).



> > Note that you could always include your own package of functions
> > to get exactly the same behaviour as you see above in Java.
> 
> I don't see how.  Not if you have lots of user-defined integer types --
> you have to declare something extra for every integer type, which does
> not match the convenience of the Java routines.

Again i was only comparing this to Java. If you want to restrict
yourself to the primitives that Java provides, then you can easily
make a package that implements "+" functions to make concatenation
easier.


Dale