TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy

TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-type:
TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Sender:
"Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:28:40 +0000
In-Reply-To:
MIME-version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (28 lines)
>> First, C++ is a "better" C -- I think that "cout << Variable;" is a lot more
>> intuitive that "printf ( .... )" (or whatever

>Well, I suppose one can get used to anything, but an operator that shifts
>bits in one context, and has a printing side-effect in another is not very
>intuitive to me.

I think that's a fair point. The other thing is, if you compare printing in many
languages, you get e.g:

writeln ("string);                - Pascal
ada.text_io.put_line ("string");  - Ada
printf ("string");                - C
(message "string")                - Emacs Lisp
print "string"                    - Basic
System.out.println ("string");    - Java

Each of them effectively provides an operation whose parameters are the
information to be printed. The use of streams in C++ for output to the display
e.g:

cout << "string";

to anyone who has used another common programming language, is just not very
intuitive.

John

ATOM RSS1 RSS2