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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,86616b1931cbdae5 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jorgie Subject: Re: Is Ada likely to survive ? Date: 1997/07/27 Message-ID: <33DB0E73.5FA0@box.net.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 259361734 References: <33D005F2.E5DCD710@kaiwan.com> <33D416AA.4622C3C8@kaiwan.com> <5r445r$8au@drn.zippo.com> Organization: SA Technologies +61-8-8221-5500 Reply-To: jorgie@box.net.au Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-07-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Nasser wrote: > > In article , > > >> Its just that if you hire someone and he has to learn a new language - > >> well that is additional cost vs hiring someone who already knows it. > > > >Yes, it is easy to hire a C/C++/Java 1 day wonder. And cheaply too. > >Someone who was flipping burgers a week before, got C/C++/Java for > >dummies or C/C++/Java in 5 days and is, voila', now a programmer who > >"knows" it. > > > > I am not sure about the "cheap" part. Java programmers with less than one > year exp. can ask for $80-$100/hr, and many get close to that. It is the latest > fashion as you know, even though many might have no clue about design and > software engineering, but no one cares, since the ones hiring most > likely also have no clue. > > As far as the pay rate for C++ vs. Ada, I notice that C/C++ programmers > make more than Ada programmers. you see, goverment and defense companies > salaries (which is where Ada is used in the US at least) are lower > than private/commerical compnaies. > > > > >Here's my take: If you want to use Ada - use it. Don't worry about > >whether it's going "to be around" or something. That's not an issue. > >If you don't want to use it, don't. > > > > Agree. good advice. one should not always follow the crowd, if we all > did, then we'll probably be still cooking our food over a fire under > open sky in some forest somewhere. (humm.. come to think of it, that does > not sound that bad :) > I agree strongly with both ideas! Jorgie > Nasser