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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,aea4cc77526f5e4a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!out02a.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!in02.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!newsfeed.telusplanet.net!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!edtnps89.POSTED!023a3d7c!not-for-mail Sender: blaak@METROID Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Separate Compilation in Programming Languages References: <7xJvj.7420$Ru4.4246@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net> <1wkwj.10399$0o7.2971@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net> From: Ray Blaak Message-ID: Organization: The Transcend User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 19:22:31 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.66.252.228 X-Trace: edtnps89 1204053751 208.66.252.228 (Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:22:31 MST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:22:31 MST Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:20104 Date: 2008-02-26T19:22:31+00:00 List-Id: 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.