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!postnews.google.com!not-for-mail From: azdo_b@yahoo.es (Alberto) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) Date: 10 Mar 2005 03:59:47 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: 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> NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.58.1.42 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1110455987 24807 127.0.0.1 (10 Mar 2005 11:59:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 11:59:47 +0000 (UTC) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9026 comp.lang.c++:44945 comp.realtime:1194 comp.software-eng:4757 Date: 2005-03-10T03:59:47-08:00 List-Id: > > > > It looks like the code was not ISO C++ compliant. > > In that case, it looks like the compiler failed to detect that shortcoming. Well, it's time for me to join the 'American Dentist Association vs C++' flame war: 1. Is Ada case-insensitive as Pascal? In that case, Ada==ADA 2. The C++ exception mechanism should be very similar to aDa's, because it was inspired partially from it [1]. 3. Many of you want us to believe that ADa performs ra nge checking without loss of performance: it can be true at compile time with fixed ranges, but it can't definitely be done without chechinkg array bounds every time data is accessed if we don't know these bounds before compiling (e.g.: typical cases where dynamic allocation of memory is used) 4. Also, some people wrote that C++ is bad because it is difficult (but not imposible, see Comeau C++) to follow 100% the Standard. The same can be said to adA, because at least if we own a compiler of the '83 Standard, we can't have the derivation a virtual function mechanisms, only interfaces (pure virtual classes)[2]. To me, it sounds reasonable to work with the last version of a compiler when possible. 5. In fact, there are standard mechanisms (STL) to handle these array bound checking issues with ease. 6. I don't know what's the point with "aDA being used in avionics or rocket science". Planes and rockets are falling from the sky from time to time; a few satellites are lost, too; NASA once failed to mix SI units and British unit system (where's the stronger type and range checking here?)... Regards, [1] "The C++ Programming Language" 3rd Special Edition, Bjarne Stroustrup, 24.2 [2] "The C++ Programming Language" 3rd Special Edition, Bjarne Stroustrup, 1.4 P.S.: For the next battle, I suggest comp.lang.ada vs comp.lang.visualbasic.