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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ffce418d7a49585f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-19 13:01:51 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!sunic!trane.uninett.no!eunet.no!nuug!EU.net!uunet!gwu.edu!gwu.edu!not-for-mail From: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Vendor bashing? Sort of. Date: 18 Sep 1994 22:19:35 -0400 Organization: George Washington University Message-ID: <35isfn$pqd@felix.seas.gwu.edu> References: <355o58$isa@felix.seas.gwu.edu> <359ia6$lkj@gnat.cs.nyu.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.164.9.3 Date: 1994-09-18T22:19:35-04:00 List-Id: In article <359ia6$lkj@gnat.cs.nyu.edu>, Robert Dewar wrote: >Mike Ryer points out that the Ada mandate perhaps encouraged too many >basic technologies to be developed, and guesses that with no mandate, >there might have been a smaller more reasonable number. I am afraid >that number might well have been zero (consider as an example Algol-68 or >many other languages designed since then). Naturally, we can all speculate forever on this point. But I find it one of the more bizarre I've seen lately. If, indeed, Ada was a solid and sound design for its times, why on earth would nobody have been willing to invest in its development, even if the DoD did not sound like it would mandate use? C++ chugged out of AT&T as a preprocessor, with no mandate; obviously companies have invested in it anyway, even before the juggernaut started rolling (and in fact, the investment is part of what is keeping the juggernaut rolling). In its day, Modula-2 was supported by a number of vendors, with no mandate. True, Modula-2 is smaller than Ada. True, Wirth made the source code for an early implementation available for commercialization, for $1000., I think it was. Modula-3 is starting to catch a bit, starting as nothing more than a joint research project of DEC and Olivetti. It's not quite as big as Ada (I guess), but gettin' there. Who invested in Betrand Meyer's Eiffel? Surely some money folks thought it was a good idea. Bertrand must have been a good salesman. And Eiffel, around for about 10 years, is starting to come into its own, along with Smalltalk (which had Xerox behind it, not a mandate). Ada 94 can certainly compete with these quite well. These three - Eiffel, M3, and Smalltalk offer many companies an alternative to C++, which they are starting to crave. Ada 94 could be a player, but won't be until it's more than vaporware (I know, GNAT...) So how come investment money is available for these and not for Ada? What are Bertrand Meyer and Adele Goldberg and the M3 folks doing right that we are not doing? Who is backing them? Mike Feldman ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Michael B. Feldman - chair, SIGAda Education Working Group Professor, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science The George Washington University - Washington, DC 20052 USA 202-994-5919 (voice) - 202-994-0227 (fax) - mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Internet) NOTE NEW PHONE NUMBER. "Pork is all that stuff the government gives the other guys." ------------------------------------------------------------------------