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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-02 10:28:36 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: Richard Riehle Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: Using Ada for device drivers? (Was: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died) Date: Fri, 02 May 2003 10:27:51 -0700 Organization: AdaWorks Software Engineering Message-ID: <3EB2AA97.74B2A9F8@adaworks.com> References: <9fa75d42.0305011727.5eae0222@posting.google.com> <4F03C83A9C6A478F.688C62D70A2EADA3.068FE6EB5E241C3B@lp.airnews.net> <9fa75d42.0305020507.6d071f2b@posting.google.com> Reply-To: richard@adaworks.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 41.b2.41.e1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server-Date: 2 May 2003 17:28:34 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63057 comp.object:62570 comp.lang.ada:36876 misc.misc:13908 Date: 2003-05-02T17:28:34+00:00 List-Id: soft-eng wrote: > The key is that by putting all these large number of trivialities in > the language, you make sure the language will be very large. 1) I suspect your understanding of the visibility rules in Ada is not well-developed. 2) Those itsy-bitsy features actually exist in most other languages, in one way or another. They are the rules the compiler must follow to achieve reliable results. In Ada, the rules are carefully defined. In many other languages, they are carefully assumed. For example, in C++, one still enjoys little surprises from time to time because some feature was not as rigorously specified (although this is getting better with time). 3) Because those rules are carefully and thoroughly specified, we can rely on the compiler to detect errors in our programs that we would not expect from compilers for other languages. This may not be important for most software. However, the targeted domain for Ada is safety-critical software. Those who build software in that domain enjoy the benefits of a specification that is complete, thorough, and reliable. 4) When developing with a language not as carefully specified, one can achieve perfectly good results when there is an understanding that quality is dependent on understanding those open-ended items not specified by the language design. 5) I recommend you choose a language other than Ada for your work. However, I also suggest you might appreciate the fact that the airplane on which you travel from one coast to the other is programmed in Ada, that the GPS satellite that helps you find your way when lost is programmed in Ada, and the communication satellite that brings you your Monday night football is programmed in Ada. Richard Riehle