Re: What's stopping you from using Ada for your next commercial project?

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 05:49:30 -0800 (PST), Maciej Sobczak wrote:

> On 10 Mar, 13:58, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> It was 15(?) years before C++ templates became usable without issues, are
>> they now? Compare investments into C++ compilers with ones into Ada.
> 
> But this has nothing to do with the original question.
> We are not 15 years ago and we don't care about somebody else's past
> investments (even if it sounds bad).

In 15 years it will be 15 years ago. It is a process. Though I personally
don't buy it. I see no reason why a language cannot be fixed once and for
all, except for certain things, which are unknown how to do. The difference
between 80's (when Ada and C++ were originated) and now is huge. Unless
really new computing paradigms arise (quantum, molecular computing), it is
perfectly clear how a good language must look like.

> We have 2011 today and a range of compilers to choose from. Some of
> them work, some of them don't. And there are new companies that start
> new projects. They don't care at all about the history of each
> particular toolchain - and frankly, they don't have to. This is the
> landscape.

Actually they do care. Granted, their knowledge is almost always mythical
and anecdotic. Normally the language and tools are chosen arbitrarily and
then the choice is justified with pseudo-technical and economical reasons.
History is one of them. Since the choice is random, more visible crap
enjoys higher chances to be chosen. This is how negative selection works.

>> because we have huge issues with the
>> compilers we are using (VC++, Borland C++, gcc).
> 
> BC++ is crap. If you have to target it, you can expect problems and I
> can understand that the combination with the other two is problematic.

How a company which produced the first people's C++ compiler managed to
achieve this pitiful state 20 years later?

Comparing resources, it seems that an Ada compiler is much easier to
manage.

BTW, people in c.l.a. are frequently discussing proposals of killer
applications to be developed by the community, e.g. internet browser,
almost as frequently as the spelling "ADA". That is rubbish. The first
thing the community must do, if it were capable to do anything at all, is a
publicly maintained living Ada compiler independent on GNAT.

> But then - maybe it is again the matter of experience and ability to
> foresee problems before they come.

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra

> But then again, we are talking about new companies starting new
> projects.

They won't hear me or you.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de