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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,6609c40f81b32989 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!n34g2000yqb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Andrea Taverna Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 13:53:19 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <2b3e186c-de89-4a92-9465-556889ef1c20@n34g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.47.222.150 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1270414399 514 127.0.0.1 (4 Apr 2010 20:53:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 20:53:19 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: n34g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=151.47.222.150; posting-account=q_H03goAAABDwevycEkYzGRVjq5lpBVA User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; it; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100216 Fedora/3.5.8-1.fc11 Firefox/3.5.8,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9865 Date: 2010-04-04T13:53:19-07:00 List-Id: On 4 Apr, 06:46, "Nasser M. Abbasi" wrote: > I was browsing the net for scientific software written in Ada, and came > across this strange statement: > > http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/329/lectures/node7.html > > "Scientific programming languages > What is the best high-level language to use for scientific programming? > This, unfortunately, is a highly contentious question. Over the years, > literally hundreds of high-level languages have been developed. However, few > have stood the test of time. Many languages (e.g., Algol, Pascal, Haskell) > can be dismissed as ephemeral computer science fads. Others (e.g., Cobol, > Lisp, Ada) are too specialized to adapt for scientific use. > > ...... > > The remaining options are FORTRAN 77 and C. I have chosen to use C " > > I find this strange, because I think Ada can be the best programming > language for numerical work. So, I do not know why the author above thinks > Ada is "too specialized to adapt for scientific use". Is there something in > Ada which makes it hard to use for scientific programming? > > The main problem I see with Ada for scientific use is that it does not have > as nearly as many packages and functions ready to use output of the box for > this, other than that, the language itself I think is better than Fortran > and C for scientific work. > > (the above quote is from a course on Computational Physics at University of > Texas at Austin, may be I should write to the professor and ask him why he > said that, but I am not sure I'll get an answer, my experience is that most > professors do not answer email :) > > --Nasser In my infinitely small experience with Ada as a CS student and self- taught practitioner I have to say that's mostly "FUD". There's a lot of pressure to make you use C or derivatives (C++, Java/ C#) or the language du jour, e.g. Python, because everyone believes it must be one of the following ways: C's, hard, cryptic, fast, Java's, quick, tedious, slow, or Python's, quicker, so-good-that-it-can't-be- serious and slower. Other alternatives must be significantly worse than one of these, no exceptions. This is not the reason for which the languages above are used, but it's the explanation given for not trying the alternatives. The only true reason for which Ada or other languages aren't used is, as you said, the amount of available software directly usable in those languages, which depends on the popularity of the language itself, which, in turn, depends on the ease with which the language can be implemented in popular architectures (x86 PC). This more or less dates back to Unix and C being the ultimate computer viruses (cfr. "The Unix Haters Handbook") ...