home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: mailhub.scitec.com.au!ramsesy
- From: ramsesy@rd.scitec.com.au (Ramses Youhana)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada
- Followup-To: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Date: 19 Feb 1996 02:54:12 GMT
- Organization: SCITEC LIMITED, Sydney, Australia.
- Message-ID: <4g8ook$bce@mailhub.scitec.com.au>
- References: <00001a73+00002504@msn.com> <3114d8fb.5a455349@zesi.ruhr.de> <4f5h5t$f13@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4g1bgf$l5@mailhub.scitec.com.au> <4g2vn3$rgi@dfw.dfw.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: scitec7.scitec.com.au
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- David Weller (dweller@dfw.net) wrote:
- > In article <4g1bgf$l5@mailhub.scitec.com.au>,
- > Ramses Youhana <ramsesy@rd.scitec.com.au> wrote:
- > >Another thing not mentioned is that Ada is far more complicated to learn
- > >fully than is C/C++. The complexity of the language can add to an increase
- > >in the probabilty of bugs being introduced and also adds to an increase in
- > >project maintanace costs.
- > >
-
- > Compared to C++? You are wrong. There are fewer features in C++, yet
- > the (draft) reference manual is larger than Ada 95 (not that this is
- > necessarily a good measure, but rather that a language that is less
- > complex would hopefully require less "langauge" to specify it). My
- > personal experience with Ada 95 and C++ indicates the exact opposite
- > of your conclusion. I have a feeling you haven't used Ada 95 very
- > much to make such claims.
-
- Sorry. I had once heard that Ada was more complicated than C. However, as
- many people have posted and told me otherwise, I take the comment back.
-
- However, I am interested in knowing what the advantages and disadvantages C/C++
- and Ada (or Ada 95) languages have over each other, without having to buy a
- book on Ada (as I am unlikely to use it in my profession), especially for
- engineering applications.
-
- Ramses.
-