Re: Ada's Slide To Oblivion ...

[DPH <rally2xs@compuserve.com>]

I think part of the problem is the tools availability.

Right now, I'm programming in C++ because the code that someone else
wrote is in Borland C++ Builder 5.0.  I don't much care for the
language, prefer Ada, and if I never saw another pointer as long as I
live, it'd still be too soon.

But, would I rather program with Builder or AdaGide?  Builder, for
sure.  The debugger is far superior in Builder.  I place the cursor
over a variable and its value is displayed in a tooltip.  If I want to
set a breakpoint to "fire" on the 267th iteration thru the code, I can
go to pull-down menus and fill in the blanks and get it done without
remembering any commands.

In contrast, I was programming with the AdaGide interface and was
having trouble just getting the debugger to work at all.  Several
other people in the building had used GNAT and AdaGide and not one of
them could tell me how to make the debugger work.  I finally figured
it out for myself, but the debugger is several orders of magnitude
less usefull than the one in Builder.

I know that this is comparing apples to oranges, as AdaGide is free
and my Builder costs hundreds, but the point is that I _have_ builder,
and a comparable Ada programming environment is not observable in my
immediate vicinity at work.  

Possibly Aonix or RR Software or Green Hills has a comparable PC
programming environment, but I can't get to it because I don't have
the $$$ to invest just to try it.  I tried to buy a full-up version of
Aonix's compiler several years ago when it was advertised for $400ish.
Turned out that to get anything done, compile to DOS, etc. there was
more extras that I needed that quickly pushed the price to the $900
region.  Since I didn't have $900 to spare, I fought like crazy and
got my money back.  Is there a comparable debugger in there somewhere?
Maybe, but I wasn't about to learn the Windows programming
environment, which the Aonix tool was targeting, just to be able to
use it, and like I said, the DOS targeting feature's extra price made
it to be not a viable solution.


But as a student, you can almost always get a copy of some
high-powered C++ development environment because they're all over the
place.  There's a gal that sits across from me at work, does CM,
doesn't have a degree and is therefore getting underpaid, that is
taking C++ in an effort toward getting a computer science degree.
This morning, she's going to get a copy of Builder 5.0 to use.  If she
were taking an Ada course instead, there would be no one in the
building who could show her a comparable programming environment, much
less "loan" her a copy.  Is she gonna be happy with the high-powered
debugger, and the help system with the myriads of examples?  I think
so.  I can't think of a similar tool I could give her that would make
her just as happy with Ada.

So, anyway, I think its largely the tools.

Dave Head

On Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:24:24 -0500, "Marin David Condic"
<dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> wrote:

>In my mind, the problem comes down to marketing. All of us here know and
>pretty much agree on the reasons why Ada is technically superior. We can
>even make a pretty good business case in some areas as to why Ada makes more
>sense economically. We can even get some acquiescence on the part of many
>C/C++/Java programmers that Ada is superior in some ways - maybe even in
>most ways. So why is the choice going over to C/C++/Java instead of Ada?
>
>Clearly, Ada is not providing *something* the customer wants. Or if it
>provides it, it isn't obvious or it isn't the thing we are touting. Many of
>us have theorized about it, but a lot of that is just educated guesses. We
>suggest answers, but we lack the coordinated effort to do much about it.
>
>To rehash the past a bit - had the DoD looked at Ada less as something to be
>mandated and more as a product that needed to be sold, things might have
>gone differently. If Ada had been launched by Micro$oft instead of DoD,
>there would have been a coordinated media blitz that would have made Ada the
>household buzzword and hot topic in the computer press. But nobody schmoozed
>the media or spent money on magazine ads, press junkets, television
>spectacles, etc.
>
>Could it be turned around? I think so - but it wouldn't be easy. If Ada
>still had a large institutional backer like the DoD, it would make sense to
>hire a marketing company to a) research what the market wants, b) figure out
>what Ada has - or could be made to have - that addresses that demand and c)
>design a marketing campaign that would get the word out effectively. Lacking
>the big institutional backer, it might still be possible to get the
>marketing research done, but it needs to be done by people with expertise in
>this area. Maybe a way could be figured out to get that information under
>the umbrella of SIGAda or some other interested group? A published marketing
>study with a recommended strategy might serve to give Ada proponents a focus
>with which they might be more effective?
>
>MDC