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 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.224.129.196 with SMTP id p4mr10711343qas.6.1371514499953; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:14:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.102.71 with SMTP id fm7mr526199igb.7.1371514499905; Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:14:59 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx05.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!j2no554138qak.0!news-out.google.com!y6ni3349qax.0!nntp.google.com!j2no554137qak.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:14:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=118.209.15.61; posting-account=l8GBMwoAAADCbqdOJSbg4dBRqkD14dJd NNTP-Posting-Host: 118.209.15.61 References: <19595886.4450.1332248078686.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfy7> <2012032020582259520-rblove@airmailnet> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <12ee9bc5-3bdf-4ac0-b805-5f10b3859ff4@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Ada advocacy From: Leo Brewin Injection-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:14:59 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 2586 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:15797 Date: 2013-06-17T17:14:59-07:00 List-Id: Greetings, I have just been reading some of the older posts in this discussion and cam= e across the following objections to Ada (see quoted text below). Does anyb= ody have any opinion on this? Is it correct? Is the original poster confusi= ng the difference between a programming language and an operating system? Cheers, Leo On Wednesday, March 21, 2012 7:59:23 PM UTC+11, an...@att.net wrote: > A reasons why people do not support Ada. >=20 > Microsoft has been using multi-threads since Windows 1.0 (DOS GUI addon) > which was shipped in early 1985 and with OS/2 1.0 a hardware based=20 > intrinsic multitasking OS in 1987. So, when Microsoft went into the=20 > schools, people learned that Windows was a multi-threading operating=20 > system. And now every Microsoft language and OS platforms support paralle= l. >=20 > But, Ada has always been "Concurrent" aka DOS or batch like programming.= =20 > Aka no multi-threads or parallel design. Even in Ada 2012 (not adopted= =20 > yet), the parallel is not fully there only some simple multiple CPU=20 > design structures.=20 >=20 > Now, today, no software customer want to use a language unless that langu= age=20 > fully support multi-threading and parallel designs. So, until the ARG ful= ly=20 > embraces a true multi-threads parallel design, Ada will stay a limited us= age > language.