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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a02:3509:: with SMTP id k9-v6mr1433494jaa.35.1530735226362; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 13:13:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:aca:2b06:: with SMTP id i6-v6mr677270oik.0.1530735226175; Wed, 04 Jul 2018 13:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder4.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!85.12.16.70.MISMATCH!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer03.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!d7-v6no2003642itj.0!news-out.google.com!l67-v6ni1905itl.0!nntp.google.com!u78-v6no1992890itb.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2018 13:13:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=213.108.152.51; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.108.152.51 References: <856189aa-fa00-4960-929e-174f352310ad@googlegroups.com> <2718c8d4-5f35-4fd8-a1aa-1e60069a7a5d@googlegroups.com> <39fce60c-9f56-42fb-b679-fa08810b00ee@googlegroups.com> <3701bf07-89a5-4cb0-a704-5aebb589ca79@googlegroups.com> <2f5e4ce0-94e8-4b94-9da7-045ec90a9b22@googlegroups.com> <18554067-1382-4b43-a832-2d27aa5117d7@googlegroups.com> <8dc19505-b68a-403c-a164-f1de1864f3f1@googlegroups.com> <559657f8-bbf4-4a70-9449-f85bc98d6c6b@googlegroups.com> <590d4672-4aef-42a5-823c-57ccd291115a@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <8de6b5ba-25ab-4d46-b80c-1544f43a9b05@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Teaching C/C++ from Ada perspective? From: Maciej Sobczak Injection-Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2018 20:13:46 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 3715 X-Received-Body-CRC: 3161153856 Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:53615 Date: 2018-07-04T13:13:45-07:00 List-Id: > > My claim that Ada and C++ compilers have the same challenges when it co= mes to handling the physical project structure holds. >=20 > Yet Ada allows having a library of packages Yes, but that does not change anything in this regard. One reason is that A= ARM does not define the meaning of this concept. In some sense, the set of = source files plays the role of a library. In other words, GNAT already impl= ements the standard notion of the library in terms of source files. You can implement the same concept in some other way, for example with the = use of relational database as a backend, but AARM still does not define the= functionality of such library or why it would be any better. It might as w= ell be as dumb as a plain set of files. And ironically, for a large-scale system, I would not trust anything else t= han a dumb set of files. > Your=20 > examples are related to GNAT Which happens to be The Ada Compiler that potential users are going to use. > C++ on its part could not have a=20 > library. Wrong. Everything in the C++ standard is defined in terms of "as if", which= means that as long as the required visible effects are supported, the unde= rlying implementation can be anything. > P.S. I agree that Ada has issues with separation of implementation and=20 > interfaces but these are minor comparing to C++. And yet, after so many posts were written in this discussion, I still do no= t see any convincing example of why Ada is sooooo much better in this regar= d. On the other hand, I have presented examples showing that C++ problems e= xist in Ada, too. --=20 Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com