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: 103376,38159b1b5557a2e7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-21 04:20:27 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!newsfeed2.dallas1.level3.net!news.level3.com!crtntx1-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeed1.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!d9c68f36!not-for-mail Message-ID: <400E6E89.9020905@noplace.com> From: Marin David Condic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 (OEM-HPQ-PRS1C03) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: why ada is so unpopular ? References: <400A9B48.3060100@noplace.com> <400BD4B5.6000307@noplace.com> <400BDB7C.40100@noplace.com> <400D2150.6000705@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 12:20:26 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.165.24.48 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net 1074687626 209.165.24.48 (Wed, 21 Jan 2004 04:20:26 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 04:20:26 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:4597 Date: 2004-01-21T12:20:26+00:00 List-Id: I'm aware of who takes care of Java's library and the differences between Java and Ada with respect to reference implementation versus standards. The point is that if Java can manage to have a library and a GUI that is at least mostly portable (via reference implementation) then why can't Ada? Its proven to be a popular route and one that can be handled well enough to keep the user community happy. It adds leverage to development and makes Java a good choice for lots of apps. Is Ada going to sit around and say "Sure it could be useful to you but I won't do it because it violates some intellectual purism I have in mind..."? That just makes language choice really simple: use Java. ;-) MDC Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > > Most likely, SUN. Java is, essentially, owned by one company. > THEY define it, and they release the reference implementation. What Sun > releases, in effect, defines the "standard". > > Ada, OTOH, is not defined by implementations -- the converse in > fact. The formal standard document defines the language, implementations > are expected to conform to that standard. When Ada was first defined, > one of the requirements of the language was that there be no supersets > or subsets of the language. Any differences from the standard meant that > the result language could NOT be called Ada -- in those days, if anyone > could be said to own Ada, it was the US DoD . > > The other item is that Java's GUI is defined at a high-level, > and relies on low-level /OS specific/ code in the JVM. There is no such > beast in Ada. Any graphical library would have to be built in versions > for each OS. > > -- > > ============================================================== < > > wlfraed@ix.netcom.com | Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG < > > wulfraed@dm.net | Bestiaria Support Staff < > > ============================================================== < > > Home Page: < > > Overflow Page: < -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jsf.mil/NSFrames.htm Send Replies To: m o d c @ a m o g c n i c . r "Face it ladies, its not the dress that makes you look fat. Its the FAT that makes you look fat." -- Al Bundy ======================================================================