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: 115aec,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public From: gwinn@ma.ultranet.com (Joe Gwinn) Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/01/25 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 436957454 References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <782r25$k18$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <787f4b$jl9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <78g0oj$8sb$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <78gok5$pmc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Ultra-Time: 26 Jan 1999 03:53:47 GMT X-Complaints-To: abuse@ultra.net Organization: Gwinn Instruments Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.vxworks,comp.realtime Date: 1999-01-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Impasse. Perhaps it's just as well. In article <78gok5$pmc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com wrote: > In article > , > gwinn@ma.ultranet.com (Joe Gwinn) wrote: > > The evidence is what it is, and we cannot do much about > > it, fifteen year later. > > meaningless evidence involving a useless comparison is not > interesting now or 15 years ago. > > > > > > You have gnu C, C++ and gnat at your fingertips. > > > > What do > > > > the various components weigh? > > > > > > It is not something I would spend 30 seconds looking > > > at, because the answer to this question would convey > > > little of value! > > > > If perfect metric existed, we would use them. Absent > > perfection, we use what's avaialble. > > Please don't use *we* here. You may be happy to produce > completely meaningless data that is almost certain to > mislead, but I won't participate in this unscientific > excercise. > > > I take it the answer isn't to Ada's perceived > > advantage. > > Not at all, it is just that the result is meaningless. > Anyone perceiving an advantage or disadvantage in such > comparisons is making the same mistake you make of putting > credance in useless comparisons. > > > > > > 3. Ada83 versus K&R C? Ada83 is a factor more > > > > complex, by all metrics, than K&R C, by universal > > > >experience. > > > > > > Since this seems to be your most obvious case for > > > expecting > > > an unconditional yes vote, I will choose this one to > > > illustrate. > > > > Yep. OK. > > > > > First of all K&R C is ill defined. Lack of definition > > > results in a lot of uncertainty of semantic details, > > > and this kind of uncertainty leads to significant > > > complexity: > > > > We already agreed that Ada83 is better defined than K&R > > C, so further discussion of that is beside the point. > > Please answer the original question, yes or no. > > Please don't obfuscate with silly lawyer talk. The whole > point of my argument which you don't seem to understand > at all, but I trust others do is that this is NOT a yes/no > question! > > > > < point I am making about multiple incompatible metrics for > complexity>> > > > > > Has anyone written such an informal description of Ada83 > > as well? I never saw such a description, simple yet > > possible to program from, and one has > > to wonder if it's possible to write such a thing. > > One does not have to wonder there are several elementary > Ada texts around! > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own