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: f5d71,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 146b77,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid146b77,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public From: Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/02/06 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 441237460 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: fwall.clustra.com References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <77t3ld$nou$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79ce4s$lfq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79chc7$ko6@drn.newsguy.com> <79dodb$rhf$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79fm3e$ffs$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79fnce$iv8@drn.newsguy.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.vxworks,comp.lang.java X-Complaints-To: abuse@telia.no Date: 1999-02-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: mike writes: > In article <79fm3e$ffs$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com > says... > > > >In article , > > Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen wrote: > >> But the point you seem to be missing is that this libarry > >> now is a *standard* part of C++. > > > > > > >Yes, and the sort operator is a part of the standard > >language in the case of APL. > > > >So if C++ is better than Ada because the standard library > >has a sort built in, and therefore allows a shorter sorting > >routine, by the same argument APL must be even better than > >C++, since the sorting is even more built in, and we can > >get an even shorter sorting routine. > > > > > I think this could be solved by having a standard Ada library be > part of the "language" in the same sense that C++ standard library > is part of "C++" . > > May be in Ada 200X this could be done. Without this, Ada will have > even a harder time making it. Being a good language, without a standard > library of usefull routine and data structures readily available to all > programmers is not enough to be a successfull commerical langauge these > days. > > It is the resposibility of Ada compiler companies and the Ada experts > to get togother and come up with such a library. Who else will do it? > Without this, Ada will not survive. > > Untill Ada gets its act togother, more and more programmers will be using > C and C++ and Java and VB. > > mike I agree. Someone once said that "library design is language design", and he was very right. -- E pluribus Unix