In message <[email protected]>, Paul Rubin wrote:
> I'd say the Ada standardizers went to a great deal of trouble to specify
> and document stuff that other languages simply leave undefined, leaving
> developers relying on implementation-specific behavior that's not part
> of the standard.
OK, I have a copy of K&R 2nd Ed on a shelf within reach here. Can you point
out some behaviour that C programmers might need to rely on, that is not
specified in that document?
> Ada itself is not necessarily more complicated.
It is. Look at its baroque type structure. Hint: why is
type A is B;
a syntax error?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
