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: 103376,7b3c720a19fbb26f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Pascal Obry" <pascal_obry@csi.com>
Subject: Re: What Mac developers think of Ada !
Date: 1999/10/30
Message-ID: <01bf22b0$4b8bb9e0$022a6282@dieppe>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 542357422
References: <381A0466.2137859E@mbox5.singnet.com.sg>
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@compuserve.com
X-Trace: ssauraab-i-1.production.compuserve.com 941271819 16729 195.232.76.212
 (30 Oct 1999 08:23:39 GMT)
Organization: CompuServe Interactive Services
NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Oct 1999 08:23:39 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-10-30T08:23:39+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


 
> In terms of portability Ada is beaten by C, Java, Cobol..., in terms of
> reusability by SmallTalk, ObjC, etc. and in terms of reliability by a
> slew of smaller languages. Ada is huge, and thus the likelyhood of
> having bugs in the compiler etc. are much higher than for a small, lean
> and mean language.

These are the most stupids comments I've ever read. The first points
are completly wrong and the latest point is just nonsense.

Ok, Ada is huge and there is maybe more chances to have bugs in the
compiler. But the high level features that you lack in other languages
you'll have to "emulate" them yourself in C, Java, ObjC... and here
you are going to introduce lot of bugs yourself... Except if you are
lot more experienced than the Ada compiler builders!

And it is far easier to send a bug report to your compiler vendor instead
of fightling with your own bugs!

I've not read the article after this point :-)

Pascal.