Re: Is Ada the future? [was: Is C++ the future?]

[bobduff@dsd.camb.inmet.com (Bob Duff)]

In article <1994Oct14.103430@di.epfl.ch>,
>mbk@inls1.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:

>|> The core issue:  doing this should be possible.  (Indeed it
>|> was hard for me to imagine that it should ever have been
>|> not possible).
>|> 
>|> -- Obvious Eiffel construction.
>|> class ONE is
>|>  	a:TWO;
>|> end;
>|> 
>|> class TWO is
>|> 	b:ONE;
>|> end;

I think at least part of the reason Ada makes this a bit harder than
some other languages is that in Ada, declarations contain a lot of
executable code.  For example:

    X: Integer range 1..Function_Call(...) := Other_Function_Call(...);

Since declarations have a lot of run time semantics, there needs to be a
well-defined order in which the declarations get executed ("elaborated"
in Ada jargon).  Given this implied run-time ordering, forward
references are a Bad Thing.  Hence the need for incomplete type
declarations, and the restriction that they don't work across multiple
library units.

Note that for multiple library units, the order is implied by the
with_clauses, and is really only a partial order.

Languages that freely allow forward references usually do not have any
way to initialize variables at their declaration point, or else they
restrict the expressions to very simple forms that can be known at
compile time, so the issue of run-time execution doesn't come up.

Certainly initializing a variable with a function call can be useful.
Would it be worth it to sacrifice that in order to achieve a slightly
simpler method for doing mutual recursion across multiple library units?
I don't know.  It's a trade-off.

Note also that the designers believed that the linear elaboration model
also makes the code more readable -- at least in theory, it allows you
to read your program in order, and you won't run across references to
things you've never heard of.

- Bob
-- 
Bob Duff                                bobduff@inmet.com
Oak Tree Software, Inc.
Ada 9X Mapping/Revision Team (Intermetrics, Inc.)