Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++)

Article View: comp.lang.modula2

Article #2613

#2613

From: Dale Stanbrough
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 06:59

16 lines
1400 bytes

Robert Dewar writes:

"It is a common position to say that C (and other languages without bounds
 checking built-in, like Fortran or COBOL) are equivalent to Ada since
 bounds checking is simply an implementation matter, but it is an
 incorrect one."

I once asked Mr P.J.Plauger at a conference in Sydney 1990 if it was
ever expected that the C langauge standard would mandate bounds
checking as the _default_ value, just like in Ada. His answer was

	"Well look how much of a success Ada is!"

Would it right in saying he overstepped the bounds?

Dale :-)

Technical Details

Message-ID: <45l2oi$oji@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!macdale.cs.rmit.edu.au!dale

References:

<Pine.SUN.3.91.950929045610.23185C-100000@lagrange.uwaterloo.ca> <KANZE.95Oct9130348@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <dewar.813243156@schonberg>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!macdale.cs.rmit.edu.au!dale
From: Dale Stanbrough <dale@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2,comp.lang.modula3,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Report on defect in M2 vs C (Was Modula-2, Modula-3, C or C++)
Date: 13 Oct 1995 06:59:30 GMT
Organization: RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <45l2oi$oji@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>
References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950929045610.23185C-100000@lagrange.uwaterloo.ca> <KANZE.95Oct9130348@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <dewar.813243156@schonberg>
NNTP-Posting-Host: macdale.cs.rmit.edu.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Newsreader: Nuntius 2.0.4_PPC
X-XXMessage-ID: <ACA44C273401CB21@macdale.cs.rmit.edu.au>
X-XXDate: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 17:02:31 GMT

Reply to Parent Message