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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,93a8e26f233f1cde X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Received: by 10.68.236.170 with SMTP id uv10mr258376pbc.4.1334210201771; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 22:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Path: r9ni46695pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin3!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "J-P. Rosen" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Does Ada still competitive? Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 07:56:40 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <2667883.6.1334114293790.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pblw1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 05:56:41 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="cJo7kSTQUrCFv2/D8KKtqw"; logging-data="23600"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+voXSoKE9o0mDuTTj622hF" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:9g/217Tbrlp8tVaJpc+BtDhhrAc= X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: 2012-04-12T07:56:40+02:00 List-Id: Le 11/04/2012 22:19, anon@att.net a �crit : This is a response to FUD spread as usual by anon, to warn people not to believe this nonsense > A second problem is that every year the ARG is moving Ada toward a C like > language. An example is in Ada 2012, is functions now can use "in out" > within the parameter list As every C programmer knows, there are no in out parameters in C [...] > Which is classical C version of a procedure routine with the "return_type" > being a error code. So, will the "Exceptions" and exception handler be > next to be removed from Ada in 2020. That's a problem with existing Ada > programmers, being that they may be forced to make 100s of re-writes > to remove exceptions that no one want to do. And the ARG can not say > for certain that exception will exist in Ada 2020 or after, until they > vote on Ada 2020 RM sometime in 2020 or later. The ARG is very careful about incompatibilities, and these are introduced only when the benefits far outweighs the cost of incompatibility. As fas as exceptions are concerned, I challenge you to provide a single reference that the ARG ever considered removing them. > A third is the "Not null" clause that are use in routine's parameter list > starting with Ada 2005. That cause introduces inefficiency error checking > at the beginning of the routine that can not be truly optimized. On the contrary, it replaces many checks in the body of the called subprogram by a single check at the call site. > There are others concepts that software division in companies like NASA > or software shops do not like the direction Ada is going in because of > the ARG. Please provide a reference to support that claim (other than your own rambling) -- J-P. Rosen Adalog 2 rue du Docteur Lombard, 92441 Issy-les-Moulineaux CEDEX Tel: +33 1 45 29 21 52, Fax: +33 1 45 29 25 00 http://www.adalog.fr