TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: "Team Ada: Ada Advocacy Issues (83 & 95)" <[log in to unmask]>
From: Jean-Pierre Rosen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 18:31:07 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: Jean-Pierre Rosen <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (21 lines)
>> > * Java is a small language (not necessarily an advantage, but certainly a difference)
>> > * Java is "pure" OO. This is probably the biggest technical advantage of Java
>> > over Ada. A hybrid language like Ada95 or C++ tends to be the worst of two worlds.
>Where is it written that "pure OO" is a necessary or even
>desirable goal?  I believe in mixing the gene pool.
>-- Dave Wood, Aonix
>-- Product Manager, ObjectAda for Windows
I wholeheartidly concur. I'm playing currently with Ada-Java, and I am horrified by the way awt (the widgets toolkit) is written.
Everything is an object, i.e. to tell that a button is blue, you must dynamically create an object initialized with the color blue.

To load a web page, you dynamically create a URL object, initialized with a dynamically created STRING object, initialized with the URL...
No wonder those people badly need garbage collection!

I would argue that the Java API is a typical abuse of the OO paradigm.

(I guess this message could be seen as a troll in some newsgroups - hopefully not here ;-)