Re: The future of Ada is at risk

[Rico Secada <coolzone@it.dk>]

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 16:24:54 GMT
anon@anon.org (anon) wrote:

> 
> In <20071229040639.f753f982.coolzone@it.dk>, Rico Secada
> <coolzone@it.dk> writes:
> >I have been doing a lot of research about the usage of Ada, both in
> >industry and in the Open Source community. I am possible writing a
> >paper on the issue and needs some constructive criticism. 
> >
> >I have reached the following conclusions:
> >
> >1. Many companies are moving away from Ada towards C/C++. Many has
> >already moved during the past 10 years.
> 
> 
> 1. Most companies left in 1998 when the DOD killed the "Ada Law".
> 
> 
> 
> >2. Very few projects exists on Sourceforge and Freshmeat compared to
> >other languages like C++, Java, Python and others.
> >
> >Only 92 projects on Sourceforge.net and 57 on Freshmeat.net.
> 
> 
> 2. Most Ada projects are not for open source community and will 
> never be archive at any open source archiving site, such 
> as sourceforge, etc.
> 
> 
> >3. This is the biggest problem: Ada lacks free support on all
> >platforms. The GNU GNAT Compiler is the only Open Source compiler,
> >and it lacks proper support and implementation on a variety of
> >platforms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3. In this answer you need to spend more time doing research.
> Free support is always limited! And Adacore's GNAT is only Ada 
> that is implementation on most platforms and the number is 
> growing every day. Not sure what you mean by proper support but 
> if your talking about vendor (Adacore) support. You can pay for 
> it just like other languages. You may hate the price but it 
> does exist. 
> 
> 
> 
> >The different GNU/Linux implementations of GNAT and the different BSD
> >implementations seems to miss different aspects making it impossible
> >to port larger projects without having to buy a proprietary compiler.
> >
> >My study shows, from searching around different mailing list archives
> >on GNU/Linux and BSD, that people are very attracted towards Ada, but
> >because of a poor implementation on different platforms when compared
> >to C and C++ people stay away and focus on those languages instead.
> >
> >Problems with GNU GNAT and platform independence seems to be the one
> >major reason why Ada isn't a moving target.
> >
> >I would like your comments on this please!
> >
> >Best regards.
> >
> >Rico Secada.
> 
> 
>         First you need to learn about why Ada was created. Ada was 
> created for "High Integrity" and "True Portability" type of 
> applications. Most programmers believe at the movement that most 
> projects do not need that level of integrity. Now this is a 
> falsehood, but until most programmer realize this Ada will not move 
> in it current level of usage. And when using the standard Ada 
> libraries (Ada) the program is 100% portable without modification.
> 
> 
>         The problem with OpenBSD is that it is designed for 
> security. Which means that there are fewer application that can be 
> ported with full functionality. Even though OpenBSD was initially 
> based FreeBSD it has become quite distinct. So, in porting an 
> application from FreeBSD or other BSD's to OpenBSD it can be a pain 
> because of its use of security and distinctive design.

It was based upon NetBSD.

>         Plus, open source programming developers do not need or want 
> high security developmental system limiting them from creating 
> programs and projects just because it might violate the security on 
> the programmer's workstation. They need a more relax security 
> workstation and then add the level of security as needed for the 
> project.
> 
>         That means that OpenBSD is limited in its scope of 
> application and to be use of a platform for programming 
> development.
> 
> 
>         Now for Ada. Most programmer use a Desktop that they like 
> to write the code and perform primary debugging. Such as FreeBSD, 
> Linux, Vista and others Desktop. Then they move the code to the 
> core platform and complete the debugging and optimization phase. 
> This save time and money. Plus, sometime a programmer may not have 
> access to the core platform until the end of the development cycle.
> 
> 
>         Free Support! That's a Myth! Especially in Open Source!
> Normally free support is limited to a few weeks to a few months 
> (90 days in some cases). As for Adacore, you can get a yearly 
> support but you pay a high price for it and you may not need it.
> 
>         But for normal support. You need to study the life cycle of 
> a program and compiler. You will find out that the vendors of the 
> language compiler have limited free support and have little to no 
> support for a project. And they only port their compilers to a 
> limited number of hardware platforms. Such as IBM which only 
> supports hardware and platform it has developed. It is up to the 
> project developers and programmers to provide the true support. 
> In an examples of a traffic light system, Adacore or any or Ada 
> vendor is not responsible for support.  The support is provide by 
> two main sources: first the manufacturer of the traffic light 
> controller and second the software team that wrote the 
> controller's software.
> 
> 
> Looks to me that you need to do a lot more research before wrtting 
> your paper.
> 

Actually, it looks to me like you have just proven my point.

>