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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,243dc2fb696a49cd
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!colt.net!peernews3.colt.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsmm00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.t-online.com!not-for-mail
From: Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada Popularity: Comparison of Ada/Charles with C++ STL (and Perl)
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 16:17:34 +0200
Organization: AdaCL
Message-ID: <1219289.a4UNLEWChh@linux1.krischik.com>
References: <e749549b.0409211621.6f3d3723@posting.google.com>
 <g563l0llm9trvjcn9n9ao4vit704b43kqm@4ax.com>
 <e749549b.0409230100.6a488b25@posting.google.com> <wvbrd60dusx0.fsf@sun.com>
 <e749549b.0409231111.7d98264d@posting.google.com>
 <cj0qlt$qkh$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <uy8izu0h8.fsf@earthlink.net>
 <13bv1aau5q9ht.1fr6ixcdql72.dlg@40tude.net>
Reply-To: krischik@users.sourceforge.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: news.t-online.com 1096127777 03 18875 pnEjXxavbKyXSd1q 040925
 15:56:17
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@t-online.de
X-ID: TF-fHUZVQepGM1LnkTal3pxXLEjYAw1T4Ln66cWwiVjbDCLrFbKrcM
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.7
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4180
Date: 2004-09-25T16:17:34+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:47:52 GMT, Matthew Heaney wrote:
> 
>> And the reason why we have to write the subpgram is because Ada doesn't
>> give you any direct way of returning a reference to variable view from a
>> function, as C++ does.  But even so, in Ada you can modify objets in
>> place (in AI-302 by using a downward closure -- which C++ doesn't have).
>> That's what really matters, not the syntax.
> 
> Syntax does not matter. What matters is an ability to express an idea in
> the syntax you want. To me, the most natural syntax for modifying an array
> element is A(I) := B;

True. But only if it works. I just had some fun reading the fineprint from
std::vector::operator [] (can not insert new elements - and at least the MS
version crashes deep inside library code when you try) and
std::map::operator [] (no const version). If it does not work as expected I
rather live without and use an Insert () which then does work as expected.

With Regards

Martin

-- 
mailto://krischik@users.sourceforge.net
http://www.ada.krischik.com