Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages

[Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net>]

<adaworks@sbcglobal.net> writes:
> It is an architectural problem because, in Java, a corrupted dependency,
> something that apparently actually occurs in large-scale Java designs,
> is also going to corrupt the architecture of the software.  As noted in
> a separate post, this problem has required the introduction of special
> dependency management tools such as Ivy, Maven, and Ant -- and
> these tools are not yet able to detect all the problems though they are
> getting better.

Does the existence of gnatmake indicate corrupted dependency management in
Ada?

Tools like Ant fill the same kind of role.

> Architectural stability implies that, except under extraordinary
> circumstances, any change to some artifact of the architecture will have
> minimal impact on the rest of that architecture.  This is one valuable
> property of Ada's ability to let us defer most of our dependencies to the
> lowest level of the design possible.  This is not a property of Java, C++,
> or most other languages in current use today.

I program in a lot of languages, and I used to be heavily into Ada. I just do
not encounter the problem in a serious way with the other languages.

I easily agree that Ada is better at this, but in every language I use
currently, there are always ways to readily control dependency and separate
compilation issues.

It's just not a problem in practice.

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net                    The Rhythm has my soul.