Re: is Ada dying?

[James Rogers <jimmaureenrogers@worldnet.att.net>]

"Robert*@" wrote:
> 
> In article <3BC1C7E3.46046096@worldnet.att.net>, James says...
> >
> page 1285, "The java class libraries", right at the top of the page:
> 
> "The String class is used to create immutable string objects. Each
> time you make an update to a string, a new String object is created.
> A more efficient way to deal with these updates is to store a string in
> a StringBuffer...."
> 
> So, what is it again you said about badly documented Java classes?? I suggest
> you get a copy of the Java class libraries books if you intend to do any
> serious java programing.

Look at the word "immutable". It is technically correct. At the
same time it is not a commonly used word. The result is that many
new Java users do not understand this statement. Understanding
usually comes after discovering by experience that the String class
is best used for constant strings.

The trap still exists, however. The JNI compatibility types
provide no mapping to a StringBuffer class. The jstring type maps
to java.lang.String. Thus, if you want to communicate string data
between C and Java, you must use the expected compatibility type on
the C side, and then, surprise, you must convert the String
object to a StringBuffer object. Failure to do so will result in
the above documented performance problems.

> 
> >
> >The javadoc tool is very useful. It localizes the documentation of
> >the standard Java classes. The same can be said for the Ada RM.
> >
> 
> Not the same. I generate javadocs for all my java classes as part of
> the build process. There is no javadoc like tool for Ada. period. In Ada,
> if you want to find what is the API of a package, you have to open the
> spec and read it. No one in Java does this, they simply read the HTML
> auto generated docs. Much better presented, easier to follow, etc...

No one in Java does this because it cannot be done. Java has no
equivalent to the Ada package specification. Java had to develop
a separate solution.

> 
> 
> >The Java white paper uses a lot of unsupported buzz words to
> >describe Java. Some of my favorite are "simple" and "high
> >performance". Java is not a simple language. There are thousands
> >of standard classes to learn.
> 
> You are confusing the language itself, from the libraries.

Not at all. Either the standard libraries are part of the language,
or the language has no built in ability to perform string processing.
The language is a combination of its syntax and its standard libraries.

> Java the language is certinly simple, at least simpler than C++ which it
> is replacing. Having a huge library is a Good Thing (TM), and it have
> nothing to do with the language itself. Use the classes you need, do not
> use those you do not need. Having huge libraries means code reuse and faster
> development process.

The huge library has everything to do with the language.
Would you or anyone else use Java without those libraries? I 
think not.

> >Java is not high performance.
> >It is simply faster than a dial-up network connection.
> 
> Java these days is very fast, there are many places on the net that shows
> Java performance getting close or better than C/C++ for some applications.

Sun has been able to produce some examples of high performance Java
programs. This is a good, but not necessarily significant development.
Benchmarking systems and language implementations is always subject to
careful optimization and manipulation.

I can tell you that I have produced simple benchmarks that show
Java's real time performance and control to be terrible compared to
Ada on a Win98 computer. The Java sleep method on that operating
system is grossly inaccurate. When sleeping for 1000 milliseconds,
Java is seen to sleep anywhere from 900 to 1100 milliseconds.
On the same machine, running the same algorithm, an Ada program
always delays between 1000 and 1001 milliseconds.

> >The current state of Ada standard packages is very good. It is
> >not as extensive as the set of Java standard classes.
> >Quality and quantity are not the same thing.
> >
> 
> Ok, so lets sit here and wait for this high "quality" Ada packages that
> allow me to send an email using Ada or process an XML document or play
> a midi file, and by the time this standard high quality Ada package come
> along, no one will be left using Ada to use it.

Are you saying that the Ada packages are low quality, or are you
saying you do not find the packages you want? Those are two
clearly different issues. Again, this is a confusion of quality
and quantity.

What about the Java libraries for interfacing to Cobol and 
Fortran? Where are they? 

I looked for a fixed number class in Java. The closest I could
find was the TypeCode class in the org.omg.CORBA package.
This class only allows you to deal with fixed point types passed
to Java through CORBA.

> 
> >This is more Sun propaganda.
> 
> I do not work for Sun.
> 
> > Sun has a history of avoiding formal
> >standards.
>
> You are still not getting the point. "official" Standards do not mean
> anything.

I disagree. "Official" standards mean a lot. It is the 
"unofficial" standards that do not mean anything.

> VB has no official standard, VC++ for years did things the way MS wanted,
> Java has no "official" standard, DELPHI has no "official" standard, and
> I do not think perl has an "official" standard, etc... Ada had both an
> ansi and iso standard since 95.  Now if having an official stamp of a
> standard is important, you would think Ada will be the most widley used
> language becuase of this stamp.

Importance has nothing to do with marketing.
Popularity in business more often is a result of marketing than
technical issues.

C used to be the fad language. After that came C++, followed quickly
by VB. In the 1990's Java became the fad language to compete with VB.
Java's marketing advantage was that it is not tied to a single
vendor's operating system. VB is still very popular, but is still
limited to Microsoft operating systems. VB has also undergone
significant changes, with the clear intention that it will be 
used across operating systems with the predicted proliferation of
.NET technology.

Jim Rogers
Colorado Springs, Colorado USA