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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,beb0b7471c6440e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-21 06:56:48 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!psinet-eu-nl!psiuk-p4!psiuk-p3!uknet!psiuk-n!news.pace.co.uk!nh.pace.co.uk!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: 'Cyclone', a safer C--reinventing the wheel Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 09:27:39 -0500 Organization: Posted on a server owned by Pace Micro Technology plc Message-ID: <9tgdkt$me1$1@nh.pace.co.uk> References: <3BFA4095.8325D016@earthlink.net> <3BFAD75A.C964DE1C@boeing.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: dhcp-200-133.miami.pace.co.uk X-Trace: nh.pace.co.uk 1006352861 22977 136.170.200.133 (21 Nov 2001 14:27:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@news.cam.pace.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Nov 2001 14:27:41 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16790 Date: 2001-11-21T14:27:41+00:00 List-Id: And of course those of us who have been around Ada for a while remember all the criticisms of Ada tasking by the C/C++ crowd - how its totally useless, way too slow, contributes to code bloat, etc., and why did you need it if you could make perfectly good fork calls to an OS? (Hey! Wait a minute! I've got this great idea how we could extend C++. Its this new concept I just now invented called "Constraint Checking" where you can create a numeric type that has limits on the values it can take... :-) I suppose we should be happy that the C/C++ crowd is coming around to seeing the wisdom of having things that Ada has had all along - and its probably too much to expect that an apology be issued - but it continues to raise the question: "Why not just use Ada and be done with it?" MDC -- Marin David Condic Senior Software Engineer Pace Micro Technology Americas www.pacemicro.com Enabling the digital revolution e-Mail: marin.condic@pacemicro.com Web: http://www.mcondic.com/ "Jeffrey Carter" wrote in message news:3BFAD75A.C964DE1C@boeing.com... > > That is not the impression I got from this post. Rather, it was, "How > can they claim this is new when Ada has had it since Ada-80?" > > It reminds me more of reactions to an article a few years ago (sorry, no > reference right now) on adding concurrency to C++ that was obviously an > implementation of Ada-83 tasking in C++ terms, even using "entry", > "accept", "select", "rendezvous", and so on, but that made no mention or > reference to Ada, instead presenting the ideas as new and original with > the author. >