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: 103376,411186037d1bc912 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: ddavenpo@redwood.hac.com (Darren C Davenport) Subject: Re: Some questions about Ada. Date: 1996/05/03 Message-ID: <4md4bi$243@hacgate2.hac.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 152805177 references: <3188F63D.3325@io.com> organization: Hughes Aircraft Company newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-05-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Dave Jones (davedave@io.com) wrote: : Carl Laurence Gonsalves wrote: : > I've got a couple of questions about Ada. I have to confess that I've never : > written a single line of Ada code. I've got experience in C, C++, Modula-3, : > Java, and Scheme, and several other languages. I've recently become : > interested in finding out about Ada, partly because I've noticed that both : > Java and Modula-3 seem to have been influenced by Ada's design, and I think : > both languages are very good. : > : My opinion: Ada95 is the best all-around language for software engineering. : C++ is awful. Nevertheless, if I were starting a project today, I would : probably choose to use C++. Why?: More (and better and cheaper) tools are : available for C++, more programmers are trained to program in C++, et cetera. This is very debatable. Development tools for C++ on Unix platforms are not cheap and they are not very good. Rational's Apex tool, for example, while not terribly cheap is a much better development environment. There are still not that many good C++ programmers and any that are good can easily transition to Ada or any other language. I'd rather have sw engineers that can adapt to any language. Darren