> From: "W. Wesley Groleau x4923" <[log in to unmask]> > If I remember right, there was a message nearly a year ago stating that > the Booch Components in Ada were fewer SLOC than those in C++. I think it was rather more than a year ago (it was David Weller who said that, and I officially took over the BCs on 18.vii.98). > Would it be feasible to create C++, Java, C, etc. bindings to the > Ada Booch Components and "market" that as not merely a cute demo of > Ada, but a demo that is actually useful? Cute demo, hah!!! There are people (including myself) using the BCs where it counts. I suppose it might be possible to create C++ bindings, but I have to say that if I were faced with the need for containers in a C++ context I would choose the STL. Standards rule, even if they're "standards", and I think the STL is more than that. C -- well, that might be hard, given that the BCs are entirely based on generics. [Actually, I guess that does for C++ too - and almost certainly Java] > How does the object size, compile time, and execution efficiency > compare? I checked this for the Stack tests. I don't suppose that the figures mean much, but I compared the Ada stack_test and the C++ stackt using GNAT 3.12a2 and gcc 2.95.1 respectively. stack_test has some additional tests, while stackt includes tests using non-primitive types. I don't think there's a lot of difference. The Ada source comes to 2375 non-blank non-comment lines, executable (stripped, -O2 -gnatp) 115824 bytes, while the C++ source comes to 2781 lines, executable (stripped, -O2) 111496 bytes. The average non-white-space characters-per-line was 26 in both cases. I couldn't see the difference in the execution time (both very short). Not really compelling, sorry!