TEAM-ADA Archives

Team Ada: Ada Programming Language Advocacy


Options: Use Classic View

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

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

Print Reply
"Robert I. Eachus" <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 8 Oct 1998 18:27:43 -0400
text/plain (31 lines)
At 02:15 PM 10/8/98 -0400, Mike Brenner wrote:
>These include:
>  - lack of built-in unlimited precision arithmetic (you
>      must program it yourself),

    Sorry Mike, this actually is required.  The arbitrary arithmetic
package that most Ada compilers provide is the one that they use at compile
time to pass the ACVC tests.  What is missing in Ada 95 is a way to input
and output large numbers without a user defined package, and of course the
ability to have numeric literals for user defined types.  But I sent ACT a
neat non-bug report where a typo resulted in a very nasty test of GNAT in
this area.

   Of course, if the Information Systems Annex is supported, you have
access to types with at least 18 digits.
>  - does not automatically permit built-in access to call functions
>      in the AUTOCOMM language (although it permits C, assembler,
>      etc., and most compilers permit access to FORTRAN, C++, etc.,
>      and some Ada compilers even permit direct access to interpretive
>      languages like Java),
   I don't know AUTOCOMM, were you thinking of AUTOCODER?  Actually,
the one I miss is a good APL interface. :-) :-) :-)

                                        Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...