The Battle of the Cultures

[cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!ajpo.sei.cmu.edu!wellerd@ucbvax.Berke ley.EDU (David Weller)]

After having seen more of Greg's rantings, I begin to ask myself
if we need a little sanity check here.  Greg's comments are
inarguable.  More _people_ are turning to C++ for writing software.
The demand for Ada software is decreasing with the "Peace Dividend",
leaving Ada to fend for itself in the cold, heartless commercial
(or as Greg would say: Non-Mandated :-) world.

The problem can be summarized in three key points (apologies to
any real estate sellers): Culture, Culture, Culture.   Ada invariably
seems to be the language no single developer would pick over C++ without
being forced to (I'm generalizing here.  I'd chose Ada ANY DAY over
C++, but I'm a sick puppy :-).  Further, Ada seems doomed as a "niche"
language, specialized for large applications and obscure hardware
platforms (and, as Greg would point out, until Borland or Microsoft
start selling Ada, it will never be taken seriously in the PC world.
Then again, as I would say: "Why take the PC market seriously?" :-).

Now, Ada 9X comes along.  Will it save our hides?  Probably not.
It has features and power beyond what C++ could ever hope to support
(qualification: A lot of features, like tasking for instance, were
left out of C++ deliberately.  This doesn't make Ada "superior" to
C++, but emphasizes the directions and cultures of the two different
language domains).  However, C++ enjoys a tremendous market dominance
amongst individual programmers (and, lest we forget, large software
development teams are made up of these "individual" programmers).  
Further, 9X is quite casually washed away by the noephyte because
it lacks multiple-inheritance.

One interesting phenomenon I have witnessed in the last 4 years is that,
as a programming culture, we tend to tinker at home also.  My experience
has been that developers chose more "accessible" languages, like
Borland C++, for development at home (never mind that Meridian is
competetively priced against BC++, it still isn't as accessible).
This experience at home impacts our choices at work.  Our culture,
primarily composed of programmers (and I mean a different context
from "software engineers".  Probably not the word "hacker", more
like "casual programmer"), is driven more by what empowers THEMSELVES,
rather than what empowers a project (perhaps it would be different
if we were required to stick to a software project for it's life? :-).
Thus, project choices are generally driven by a technical "leader"
serving their own agenda (it is quite possible that that person's
"agenda" is good software engineering, thus leading them toward Ada).

So, are we missing the real point?  That the self-empowering nature
of our commercial market is grinding Ada into dust?  Whether deliberate
or not, I feel we are looking at an unstoppable change in our culture.
We will begin to accept index errors and living inside of debuggers
as casually as ever.  We will howl that Ada is a "better" language, 
and grouse in frustration as more C++ compilers become available.
Some of us, myself included, will not give up hope.  We've used both
languages, we know the advantages and disadvantages of both, and
we realize that, as a language that supports development of reliable
software, Ada is a better choice.  Perhaps in five years, this will
all change.  Perhaps GNAT will change it sooner.  Perhaps.

In any case, you must begin to step outside your fold.  Run with
the wolves.  Engage in heated arguments about the virtues of Ada over
C++ with a C++ organization.  A little "In your face" debate never
hurt anybody.  Besides, I guarantee both sides will learn something.
Reading Greg's posts can get a little depressing (and sometimes 
tiresome :-), so do something about it!  

-- 
-Comments above aren't neceessarily the opinion of the SEI, AJPO, or CAE-Link-
David Weller  |  Have you hugged your DRAGOON lately?
----I'm the Ultimate International Masochist: I speak Ada AND Esperanto!-----