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 10.236.126.79 with SMTP id a55mr3344816yhi.4.1402404176990; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 05:42:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.47.201 with SMTP id m67mr12008qga.29.1402404176952; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 05:42:56 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!au2pb.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!hw13no6066317qab.0!news-out.google.com!q9ni357qaj.0!nntp.google.com!hw13no6066315qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 05:42:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2.121.192.150; posting-account=L2-UcQkAAAAfd_BqbeNHs3XeM0jTXloS NNTP-Posting-Host: 2.121.192.150 References: <1402308235.2520.153.camel@pascal.home.net> <85ioo9yukk.fsf@stephe-leake.org> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <255b51cd-b23f-4413-805a-9fea3c70d8b2@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: a new language, designed for safety ! From: Lucretia Injection-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:42:56 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Bytes: 3565 X-Received-Body-CRC: 15894145 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:20196 Date: 2014-06-10T05:42:56-07:00 List-Id: On Tuesday, 10 June 2014 13:28:33 UTC+1, Simon Clubley wrote: > Apple's customers) would probably find Ada too stifling. >=20 > This is also one of the reasons why we don't see a large Ada uptake > in other areas even though GNAT has been freely available for years. The name and the history of the language don't help either. > (The other reasons include the restricted set of host and target > platforms for Ada when compared to C and the fact the nicely the fact that the FSF version has been crippled on purpose to stop the buil= ding of certain said targets, you mean? > pre-packaged ACT version of GNAT is licenced under the GPL instead > of the GMGPL.) This is a major problem actually. With GCC C/C++/.Obj-C/etc., someone can c= ome along and just write a mobile app and sell it without any fear of being= sued as you didn't release the source. Not so with ACT's GPL'd GNAT, all b= ecause they want people to shell out a stupid amount of money for support, = which people writing mobile apps just cannot afford. The fact that they now= release all their libs as GPL is just a joke as well; may as well say "we'= ll make sure nobody uses Ada for anything but trains, planes and bombs." > For general programming for which C would be used, if you want to get > your typical C progammer using something safer than C, I still think > my Oberon-14 idea represents the general path to take: create a > "safer", not "safe", language with some of the basic Ada concepts > transplanted into it and which is easy for a C programmer to learn. I have thought of something similar. I'll have to try to find your idea and= take a look. > Such a language must be _easy_ to port to a wide range of host and > target platforms and you must be able to replace existing library > code written in C with code written in your new language without > disturbing the rest of the application. >=20 > Once you have them exposed to a "safer" programming mindset, _then_ > you can introduce them to Ada for the bigger stuff. I've actually considered just foregoing Ada and trying to create a language= better than the C's and other derived languages but applying ideas from Ad= a. This thought keeps stopping me from progressing any of my Ada projects, inc= luding game creation ones. Luke.