Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 7/7/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Structure Comparison (ADA vs C)
Message-ID: <1279@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Oct-83 12:17:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1279
Posted: Wed Oct 12 12:17:41 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 14-Oct-83 00:45:48 EDT
References: watmath.5855 unc.5972 <4178@root44.UUCP> <80@taurus.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 25

Ok, does anybody have ADA implementations for all of the following:

PDP-11
VAX-11
Intel 80[12]*8[0568]
Zilog Z8[0]+
Motorola MC680[0-9]+
National Semiconductor (16|32)0(08|16|32)
Data General Eclipse
IBM 360 and successors

etc., etc., etc., in which one can write most, if not all, algorithms in a form
which generates as efficient code as the C implementations for the above
machines?  (No cheating and dragging in "ADA engines", not that the iAPX 432
is blazingly fast...)  Until there are such implementations, for writing
software for all the above machines - or even just writing software for any
two of the machines above which run UNIX - ADA isn't better than C for getting
real work done.

Besides, there is much debate about whether ADA really does make it harder to
write bad programs; C.A.R. Hoare probably wouldn't like C's laxity but he
doesn't think ADA is a good idea either.

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,mcnc,we13,brl-bmd,allegra}!rlgvax!guy