TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Michael K Rohan <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 5 Nov 1996 22:25:08 -0800
Reply-To:
Michael K Rohan <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Hi,

On a positive note with regard to Ada 95.  I was at a job interview
recently at Oracle and, during the interview, was asked my views C++.
I responded positively, I program in C++, but was guarded about
using some of the "newer" features, e.g., templates and exceptions due
to either lack of implementation or system incompatibilities when
porting.  This is compounded by, what I feel, is a "fluid standard".
I work in scientific computing and have just recently realize that all
our code will have to be re-visited as the "standard" complex class is
now a template class.  I took the opportunity to also state my view that
Ada 95 is a better designed language and, from my limited experience,
feel projects would probably fare better if implemented in Ada 95 (I
have been learning Ada 95 over the past few months).  The response I got
was "Yes, I have been hearing a lot of good things about Ada 95."  It's
not much, but is it positive.

This note is just to temper the discussion on the NRC Report.  Ada 95 is
about the best language out there and people are beginning to notice.
C++ seems to be evolving into a monster and people cannot fail to notice
that.

Have fun,
Michael.

--
Michael Rohan                                           [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2