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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,51ee34fe49f38ac4 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-08 06:24:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn1feed!worldnet.att.net!135.173.83.55!bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3CB199FD.3090201@worldnet.att.net> From: Jim Rogers User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada's future ? (newbie) References: <3cb17fa1$0$27754$5039e797@newsreader01.highway.telekom.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 13:24:08 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.86.32.99 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1018272248 12.86.32.99 (Mon, 08 Apr 2002 13:24:08 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 13:24:08 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22215 Date: 2002-04-08T13:24:08+00:00 List-Id: To paraphrase Mark Twain "The news of Ada's death has been greatly exaggerated." Ada does have an active standard. The most recent standard is dated 1995. Ada also has something C++ still struggles for: compilers that implement the entire standard. Ada's useage is reportedly growing slightly, which does not support the concept of a 'dead' language. I find Ada to be a fun language to work in. Jim Rogers Holger Zwar wrote: > Hi, > first, i don't want to start a discussion like 'which is the best > language' - i think there are a lot of possible and right answers. I've read > a lot about Ada95 and i think it might be a good choice for a new project > (DSP Audio) compared to C++, which i know very well. But i don't want to > learn and use a 'dead' language which has no future (I've read that there's > no standarisation anymore). > Thanks for reading > Holger > > >