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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.66.188.202 with SMTP id gc10mr58034373pac.23.1470237885913; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 08:24:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.157.34.133 with SMTP id y5mr4193657ota.4.1470237885873; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 08:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!f6no7046153ith.0!news-out.google.com!d130ni23538ith.0!nntp.google.com!f6no7046152ith.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 08:24:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1703ca9a-2665-4435-9564-4abd8a77ebe9@googlegroups.com> Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=94.107.233.115; posting-account=6m7axgkAAADBKh082FfZLdYsJ24CXYi5 NNTP-Posting-Host: 94.107.233.115 References: <31c22983-150c-4dab-abba-588e15f75914@googlegroups.com> <84d258dc-b60d-4a49-9af4-27dd6f3e5f5f@googlegroups.com> <1703ca9a-2665-4435-9564-4abd8a77ebe9@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <12ca4276-cd1e-49ae-b5dc-56432e721687@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: New IEEE Language Popularity Ratings From: Serge Robyns Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 15:24:45 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:31271 Date: 2016-08-03T08:24:45-07:00 List-Id: On Friday, 29 July 2016 14:37:21 UTC+2, brbar...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, July 29, 2016 at 2:41:07 AM UTC-4, Jerry wrote: > > Try setting sliders related to people seeking help--Google and both Stack Overflows, for example--to zero, and Ada moves up a lot. > > One other factor may be of interest in thinking about these ratings: > the importance of libraries for current ways people build software. > The tendency appears to be to select standard libraries and hope they > remain stable enough to serve over a reasonable length of time. Once > people get used to using this approach, they don't write as much code > themselves - they just figure out how to hook in a library to do the > work. I suppose you could call it the "cut and paste" approach to > developing software. > > Bruce B. Is this not the whole purpose of reusable libraries? Otherwise we will all still program in assembly language and write our containers the hard way for example .... And yes this is the main driver to choose a programming environment in the field of general programming. Writing bindings is a "patch" to have access to those libraries. Companies prefer to pay people to do "new" things not to "reinvent" the wheel.