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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: ghporter@NetXpress.com (Glenn H. Porter) Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada Date: 1996/03/21 Message-ID: <4iroks$j1b@ferrari.NetXpress.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 143598725 references: <4iah20$p7k@saba.info.ucla.edu> organization: Digital Alpha Server NetXpress.com newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++ Date: 1996-03-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I missed the original post on this thread, but I have a couple of observations about ADA vs C. First, ADA was invented so that DoD could have a single, maintainable sourcecode language for all _embedded_ computing systems (check the legislation on this--embedded systems are specifically stated in the statute). At the time the requirement was stated, C was a private language, and the whole community was awash with different, incompatable versions of a number of languages that we'd call "stupid" or worse today. Second, a large number of customers in DoD have missed the meaning of "embedded systems", and therein lies the crux of the I/O problem. An embedded system is a computer that, say, runs a targeting computer on a fighter, or the navigation system on a missile. The I/O is hardware dependent, but the software must not be, because the system may be upgraded at any time for new functionality or differing missions or threats. There are _no_ embedded desktop applications. I've seen an application that was embedded but ran on an Intel-based laptop. This program was not much more than a text processor that told microprocessor-controlled radios what to do and told the operator what they said in return. The silly thing was almost 200k of executable! But it was maintainable, and that's the key. That said, I think ADA is a great language for applications that use hardware I/O, because the hard part is taken care of by the hardware. The meaning of the input, and the outputs needed are the business of the programmer. Finally, the replies on this thread seem to have degenerated to the level of C programmers snapping at each other. How does that fit in on the thread? Glenn