Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- From: <adaworks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 08:01:49 GMT
"Maciej Sobczak" <no.spam@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eputhf$p8u$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Markus E Leypold wrote:Both statements are untrue.
Ada 95 *is* terrible. It doesn't have containers nor unbounded strings and it
cannot even return limited types from functions. Yuck! ;-)
There are numerous container libraries available for Ada 95.
However, there is no standard container library as part of
the language standard.
Three string libraries are available: Fixed, Bounded and Unbounded.
While the inability to return limited types from a function is a bit of
an inconvenience, it does not prevent one from writing subprograms
that support the equivalent kind of thing using an in out mode parameter
in a procedure. Further, one is not required to use limited types when
they are inconvenient. That being said, the recent change allowing
limited types in return statements is, potentially, an improvement.
Richard Riehle
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- From: Markus E Leypold
- Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- From: Jean-Pierre Rosen
- Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- References:
- Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- From: Markus E Leypold
- Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- From: Maciej Sobczak
- Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- Prev by Date: Re: GC in Ada
- Next by Date: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- Previous by thread: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- Next by thread: Re: How come Ada isn't more popular?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|