Re: Ada's Slide To Oblivion ...

[Adrian Hoe <byhoe@greenlime.com>]

Marin David Condic wrote:
> 
> Like I said - it depends on what you want to count. We could discuss that
> until the cows come home. Clearly, some consumer-oriented box with 5000
> lines of C code in it is not really in the same league with an F-22 with
> millions of lines of Ada code in it. But last I heard the government was
> only going to buy a few hundred F-22s over the project life whereas the
> little 5000 line C doohickie might be selling in the millions of units. So
> which is the more "important" project and how would you stack them up with
> respect to which is the more "important" programming language for embedded
> systems?
> 
> I still don't think that any way you want to count it that Ada is going to
> score as a major player in the embedded computing world anymore. It's kind
> of relegated to the "also ran" category - which is a shame because lots of
> people will admit that it really is a good language for embedded computing.
> There are just a lot of factors that hinder its success in this area.
> 
> I think that as Ada continues to grow in the non-embedded fields it will
> start encouraging more usage in the embedded world. Tools become more
> prevalent and experience builds with it and along the way it will trickle
> into the embedded world. But it will be a slow process and it is dependent
> on how successfully Ada penetrates the more "normal" sorts of application
> development.

More people are accepting Ada now, at least in my company (new staff).
Ada will not have the glory of other development tools eg. C++ Builder,
Delphi, etc. until much bindings are available for programmers'
disposal. GtkAda and Glade are just the beginning. There is still a long
way to go for Ada to be accepted in the non-embedded, business
applications area.

> MDC

-- 
                              -- Adrian Hoe
                              -- http://greenlime.com/users/adrian.hoe