home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++
- Path: news.bton.ac.uk!je
- From: je@bton.ac.uk (John English)
- Subject: Re: on OO differnces between Ada95 and C++
- Message-ID: <DnDuEG.8Kx@bton.ac.uk>
- Organization: University of Brighton, UK
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
- References: <4gbq7q$g08@qualcomm.com> <Dn4J2F.uI@bton.ac.uk> <NEWTNews.825015458.26661.geneo@medusa.ppp.rational.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 12:23:03 GMT
-
- Gene Ouye (geneo@rational.com) wrote:
- : If you're interested in religious language flame wars, you could
- : say that this is a case where Ada doesn't to what is expected. But
- : if you understand what the subtype declaration really does, then this
- : behavior really should be expected. In other words, whether you're
- : doing C++ or Ada, you can't expect the language subtleties to be
- : "expected" unless you get some education.
-
- Ooooooh! :-)
-
- --
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- John English <je@brighton.ac.uk>, Dept. of Computing, University of Brighton
- "Disks are divided into sex and tractors..."
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-