From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, RATWARE_MS_HASH,RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,dab7d920e4340f12 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Tim Behrendsen" Subject: Re: C is 'better' than Ada because... Date: 1996/07/30 Message-ID: <01bb7da5$ef97cf00$96ee6fcf@timhome2>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 170962199 references: <31daad10.57288085@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <31ebfbd7.330061022@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <31EE19D1.6977@lfwc.lockheed.com> <31efe069.63062188@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <4sopkp$dao@itfhps00.itf.hcsd.ca> <31f3c396.238311543@netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov> <01bb78b1$28455ec0$87ee6fce@timpent.airshields.com> <31F613F3.2781E494@escmail.orl.mmc.com> <01bb7bf9$b89a1740$96ee6fcf@timhome2> content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 organization: A-SIS mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c Date: 1996-07-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Dirk Dickmanns wrote in article ... > "Tim Behrendsen" writes: > >Again, the question, > >and I ask this respectfully, "If it's so good, why isn't it used more > >universally than it is?" And, if C is so bad (in many people's opinion, > >not mine), why is it used almost universally, despite its acknowledged, > >real problems? > > I posted five reasons from an earlier post of yours, I'll add some > now: Sorry -- I thought you were joking before. > Not willing to invest conversion cost -- return of investment could > take more than a single project. > General unwillingness to change -- it takes personal effort to fight > the intricacies of other languages. > Everybody else uses C. > And again: Not knowing Ada. Same answer for the four of these ... Ada has been around long enough to where if it gave real benefits, some bright people would have made the investment to pave the way. It just hasn't happened. People have poured endless money into C++, Java, etc. Again, why? It's used all over the place in Aerospace (That was kind of catchy ... maybe that should be the Ada slogan ;-> ). You would think there would be some crossover somewhere. > There is neither a Borland Ada for Windoze nor a Visual Ada from > Mickey$oft. Again, why? There are endless companies producing C++ compilers, Pascal compilers, Java compilers, Modula III compilers for god's sake, why not Ada? > >-- Tim Behrendsen (tim@airshields.com) > > I wouldn't choose a domain so closely named to airheads.com !-) Well, it sort of chose me ... my company was bought out by them. :) -- Tim Behrendsen (tim@airshields.com)