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:
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 7 Jun 2000 09:51:45 -0500
Reply-To:
"W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
> > Yes, they were originally in Ada 83, then they were completely redesigned
> > in C++.  My point is that the "third generation" in Ada 95 is FEWER lines
> > of code than the C++.
>
> Is there some documentation showing this?

It was stated in a Team-Ada post some months ago.  Last time I tried to get
into the archives, it required a SIG-Ada password.

> > _IF_ it is also more efficient in time and/or space, and more reliable, it
>
> I would like to see these figure too.

That is just speculation on my part (notice the "IF").  Since they're in
Ada, it's "reasonable" speculation, but still speculation.

--
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

ATOM RSS1 RSS2