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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3ccb707f4c91a5f2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: davedave@io.com
Subject: Re: Java vs Ada 95 (Was Re: Once again,
 Ada absent from DoD SBIR solicitation)
Date: 1996/10/12
Message-ID: <325FFB39.15A4@io.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 189017984
references: <325BC3B3.41C6@hso.link.com>
 <Dz2B9H.9HD.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
 <ROGOFF.96Oct10095045@sccm.Stanford.EDU> <325D7F9B.2A8B@gte.net>
 <dewar.845088498@merv>
cc: davedave@io.com
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: GTE Intelligent Network Services, GTE INS
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I)
Date: 1996-10-12T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> "Garbage collection, by itself, is significant enough for one to
> seriously consider choosing Java over Ada for projects which do not
> require low-level timing control.
> "
> 
> Nope, that does not make any sense. Any project for which Java is currently
> suitable could equally well be done in Ada using the Intermetrics compiler
> to JBC, which has identical garbage collection capability.

An excellent idea Robert -- except for one big problem:  Engineers who are 
trying to build reliable, commercial products don't generally like to use 
proucts which are still in beta.  

-- Dave Jones