TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Bill Beckwith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Fri, 14 Mar 1997 22:37:43 -0500
text/plain (34 lines)
Bikin' Bob wrote:
> Daniel Wengelin wrote:
> > Fellow Teamers,
> <<snip>>
> > Then comes a few unverified rumours that ObjectAda
> > (or any of the other compilers that I have not personally used
> > recently) barfs on the third level of generic instantiation, or
> > something.
> We've been using VADS Self for Win32 intensively for the past couple of
> years, and it has problems that are caused by the use of generics.  I
> won't go into details here on the list, if you want to know more, e-mail
> me.
> Even though I'm NOT a C/C++ proponent by any stretch of the imagination,
> it doesn't seem to be helpful to our cause that a compiler that costs as
> much as VADS, and that is held out to be the best available, has
> problems such as we've seen here.

I am very sympathetic to the problem you have experienced with VADS.
However, if find that Ada programmers have much higher expectations
of their compilers than C++ programmers.

You just would believe how unbelievably bad some of the C++ compilers
are when you use the features like templates and exceptions.  Since
not all C++ compilers support these features many C++ programmers
avoid these features.  GNAT passed g++ in quality a long time ago.
And don't even get me started on the state of Java compilers right
now ...

-- Bill