From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 26 Jul 93 21:15:02 GMT From: agate!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!csn!news.usafa.af.mil!kirk!cwara ck@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Chris Warack ) Subject: Re: Ada is not a failure. Message-ID: <231hgm$sll@usafa2.usafa.af.mil> List-Id: In article , dt4@persimmon.ucsb.edu (David E. Goggin) writes: |> tne@world.std.com (Thomas N Erickson) writes: |> |> >Nevertheless, it should not be considered a failure. It is one of the few |> >programming languages GROWING in use and there are several very successful |> >applications (both military and civilian). |> |> A nitpick here: I think that even the most obscure languages are growing -- |> if language X had 10 people who knew it last year and 20 that know it |> this year then its growing. The languages that are not growing are |> probably Fortran and Cobol -- even these are doubtful (my alma mater is |> still cranking out engineers having taken the required Fortran course.) |> |> *dt* Well, at HOPL2 Guy Steele indicated that Lisp was on the decline. I also remember Jean Sammet saying something to the effect that only a fraction of the languages that have existed are being used at all... Which languages fit X besides Ada, C++, and Smalltalk. Oberon? I can think of several others on the decline besides Fortran and Cobol -- Jovial, CMS-2, Atlas ... -- Christopher A. Warack, Capt, USAF Computer Science Department, US Air Force Academy cwarack@kirk.usafa.af.mil (719) 472-2401