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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,103b407e8b68350b
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-07 20:24:36 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!uunet!sea.uu.net!sac.uu.net!ash.uu.net!spool0901.news.uu.net!spool0900.news.uu.net!reader0900.news.uu.net!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 23:24:34 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Anybody in US using ADA ? One silly idea..
References: <3E147D79.2070703@cogeco.ca>
 <BA3A535D.177F%yaldnifw@blueyonder.co.uk>
 <ba162549.0301030124.237c7a7e@posting.google.com>
 <4519e058.0301031434.51a0c880@posting.google.com>
 <ba162549.0301040053.1e7dbedc@posting.google.com>
 <av6hla$cggao$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <skHR9.253662$a8.162913@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
 <av9egl$dd34q$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <yR4S9.282608$a8.59712@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
 <avc2uh$e3qv9$3@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de> <v1jla7d2m6gn1c@corp.supernews.com>
 <3chl1vg7p83jlgcgjndaa8n5lnh11a3l5t@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <3chl1vg7p83jlgcgjndaa8n5lnh11a3l5t@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Organization: KBC Financial Products
Message-ID: <1041999874.693157@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
Cache-Post-Path: master.nyc.kbcfp.com!unknown@nightcrawler.nyc.kbcfp.com
X-Cache: nntpcache 3.0.1 (see http://www.nntpcache.org/)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.253.250.10
X-Trace: 1041999875 reader0.ash.ops.us.uu.net 10921 204.253.250.10
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32723
Date: 2003-01-07T23:24:34-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> Shared bodies are working against the C++'s myth about unbeatable
> efficience of templates.

Do you have any evidence that this is a myth, rather than a fact?

That is, in the C++ model of generics, the compiler has all the type
information available at the point where it is compiling the code,
so it's hard to see how any other model can be *more* efficient. So
the best you can hope for is to be as efficient. I think of the
canonical case as being std::sort, which can inline comparison between
objects, so sorting an array of integers involves just doing an inline
machine integer compare.

Not only that, but the C++ model allows for specialization, so that the
body of code in question does not all have to come from the same block of
generic code - there can be completely different bodies for different
types. This makes generic sharing even less likely there.