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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,2702c1ed8be62863 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: David Gillon Subject: Re: What ada 83 compiler is *best* Date: 1998/12/08 Message-ID: <366D4B3B.504810FB@gecm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 420086026 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <3666F5A4.2CCF6592@maths.unine.ch> <87k903u4oj.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: GMAv Rochester Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-12-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Rick Thorne wrote: > My question to the news group was this: does Ada have a future? Yes. More specifically, in the general arena probably only in niche markets, but in the safety critical arena there really isn't any language that has been shown to be superior -- Java deliberately opts out of safety critical, C++ has well known questionmarks over it's suitability, Eiffel is possibly the only new contender on the market, but needs a good safety critical demo. Language popularity scores precisely zero when detemining the best language to keep 300+ people safe on an ETOPS flight that's 180 minutes from the nearest airport. I choose to work in safety critical avionics, I believe Ada is the safest language for this particular area of programming, therefore I will continue to advocate (and expect) its use. As for continuing usage, think about maintenance if nothing else. The 777 probably has thirty years of production left (cf 747, 30yo and still in active development), and twenty years service life for individual airframes is normal -- that takes me well past retirement, thanks.... -- David Gillon MAv Rochester