Re: What to Do?

[Lao Xiao Hai <laoxhai@ix.netcom.com>]

Ehud Lamm wrote:

> In fact, I think one problem Ada had (note past tense) was lack of amateurs.
> As opposed to such "cool" languages like C++ and Java (and in the old day
> Turbo Pascal), most hobbyist never hear of Ada, or hear misleading info (see
> Jargon File).

While visiting a friend who is a professor at a well-known university in the
Western U.S., I asked him about Ada at their school.   When I made my inquiry,
we were touring their new computer lab facilities.  His answer was that they
had pretty much abandoned Ada in favor of more relevant languages.   A nearby
student overheard our conversation.   "Ada?   Oh that's GNAT.   I have it
downloaded on my machine and have been experimenting with it."

My friend was as surprised as I.   One of the good things that has happened is
the free availability of GNAT along with its source code.   There are actually
students out there learning about compilers and languages by downloading GNAT
and examining its implementation.

Upon being introduced to the Department Chair that same day, I learned that he
despised Ada.   To his arteriosclerotic mind Ada was old, clunky, hard to
understand, irrelevant, expensive, and just not worth the time.   Psychologists
call this kind of observation, "projection."  I am sure many students felt the
same way about him. We can be thankful for the uncongealed minds of our
students.

Richard Riehle