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: 103376,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 109fba,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: 115aec,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Thread: f43e6,703c4f68db81387d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid109fba,gid115aec,gidf43e6,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!wn13feed!worldnet.att.net!12.120.4.37!attcg2!ip.att.net!news.binc.net!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.realtime,comp.software-eng Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Teaching new tricks to an old dog (C++ -->Ada) Date: 5 Mar 2005 13:54:57 -0600 Organization: LJK Software Message-ID: References: <4229bad9$0$1019$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> <1110032222.447846.167060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <871xau9nlh.fsf@insalien.org> <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk> NNTP-Posting-Host: eisner.encompasserve.org X-Trace: grandcanyon.binc.net 1110052393 10296 192.135.80.34 (5 Mar 2005 19:53:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@binc.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 19:53:13 +0000 (UTC) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8664 comp.lang.c++:44202 comp.realtime:948 comp.software-eng:4479 Date: 2005-03-05T13:54:57-06:00 List-Id: In article <3SjWd.103128$Vf.3969241@news000.worldonline.dk>, "Peter Koch Larsen" writes: >>> - You might end up making more mistakes with Ada because of >>> inexperience with Ada. >> >> Wrong. I took that route 4 years ago, and found that the compiler >> would catch all my stupid mistakes. When it comes to reliability, Ada >> compilers are your friends; C++ compilers are your enemies. > > Out of curiosiy, could you give some few examples where Ada catches faults > not found by a C++ compiler. I assume - of course - code written in modern > C++: no casts, functions instead of macroes, a limited use of pointers and > so on. Which C++ compilers prevent those practices deprecated in your second sentence ?