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=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,PLING_QUERY,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b6d862eabdeb1fc4
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.wiretrip.org!feeder3.cambriumusenet.nl!feeder2.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!87.79.20.105.MISMATCH!news.netcologne.de!ramfeed1.netcologne.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Ada noob here! Is Ada widely used?
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <4bfbbdcb$0$6882$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net>
 <93a818e9c91ccba6d8ea3a7258ef3265@mixmaster.it>
 <4bfbdd95$0$6776$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <htgt3m$n53$1@news.eternal-september.org>
 <7aqxv2d9qatt.owvat4lrco20.dlg@40tude.net> <op.vc9wwjk7xmjfy8@garhos>
Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 09:42:24 +0200
Message-ID: <39rnn7awt39e.17vq9reyoo9ee.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 May 2010 09:42:24 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7f18f1e0.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=Z3nSc\DZ7W1=FQB?mjjV50McF=Q^Z^V384Fo<]lROoR18kF<OcfhCO;Qj1Xe=8[n[=[6LHn;2LCV>7enW;^6ZC`4\`mfM[68DC3?fL3:`gUC8?
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11035
Date: 2010-05-26T09:42:24+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Tue, 25 May 2010 20:13:21 +0200, Yannick Duch�ne (Hibou57) wrote:

> Le Tue, 25 May 2010 19:34:43 +0200, Dmitry A. Kazakov  
> <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> a �crit:
>> 2. Practically, is there any SQL parser written in SQL?
> Because SQL is a DSL.

Which are in majority. Universal-purpose languages are in minority. Likely
further limited to predominantly imperative languages.

>> P.S. I bet Ada is better for writing a C compiler than C.
> May be or may be not. This can be done well in C too (the author is as  
> much important as the implementation language) and then, C advocators will  
> obviously try to create it using C. So C is most likely to be the choice.

It is about personal preferences, not as J-P said, about some language
structures. Language structures are largely shared by all universal-purpose
languages.

> If the product is good, this does not matter for  
> users if the source is hard to maintain and understand.

1. Users do not maintain compilers
2. C code is unmaintainable
3. I never saw a good C compiler, probably because none was written in Ada
(:-). The best was DEC C, I guess it wasn't in C (Maybe I am wrong)

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de