Re: What is wrong with Ada?

["Chip Orange" <Chip.Orange@psc.state.fl.us>]

<gautier_niouzes@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:1176193942.294580.109900@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> "Chip and Allie Orange":
>
>> The other reason I see is that it's not easily compatible with ActiveX, 
>> COM,
>> .net, and all the other interfacing standards that development add-ons 
>> are
>> sold for (in the Windows world).  It's advantages of taking less effort, 
>> in
>> the long term, to maintain a given project, are offset by having to "roll
>> your own" everything in the beginning.
>
> Did you look at GNATCOM ?
> It provides automated interfacing with COM for the GNAT Ada compiler.
>

I haven't given it the attention it deserves, but I did say "easily".  I 
also largely meant .net controls, since I was just handed those, on another 
project, as the only API a certain manufacturer was going to offer.

I'm not sure when GNATCOM was released as stable, and I'm not sure if it is 
compatible with ActiveX, but I'm guessing GNATCOM was released long after 
ActiveX was in use, and yes, I've also been handed several APIs from 
manufacturers, only available in ActiveX, some years ago, when on another 
project, and I needed to choose a programming environment to deal with them.

I'm not defending any of this, just pointing out how many IT shops are run, 
with their IT managers making the decisions on development environments 
using the criteria I've pointed out. :(

Chip