Re: Ada folks need to talk to C++ folks more

[Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>]

On 31.07.12 08:08, wrp wrote:
> With good graphics support, maybe Ada would be ready to support game
> engine development.


A an engine for new hardware?

I.e., build computers that are especially good for playing
games, so cheap and easy to program that it becomes disruptive?
Maybe Ravenscar like profiles might be interesting, except that
a character/object/whatever would have to be allowed to die.
Who is going to finance so vague an idea?

An engine for existing hardware?

XBox is by Microsoft. Dark matter. I don't think they would do
more than just emborg a few good bits they happen to see in Ada,
and then continue to use their own compiler technology.
If they haven't already done so.

Sony? I heard they have dropped the idea of specialized
hardware facing both a lack of knowledgeable programmers
("Too difficult to program!") and a short life cycle of
CPUs making standard CPUs and standard graphics processors
capable enough. OTS components will mean relatively lower cost.
And even if not, Ada is only beginning to get run-time systems
tailored to these types of computers, AFAIK.

Nevertheless, some types of real-time communication
are said to be easier to express in Ada. Is there much use
of consensus protocols in game engines? If so, are they
better with Ada?

Apple's hardware. Perhaps one could use SofCheck's (now AdaCore's)
compiler and write the thing in Ada, using compiler output (C and
also C++) as input to the compilers that Apple suggests one
should use. Will current Ada tasking support programmers, though?
If there is no Ada RTS that has tasking employ Apple's
Grand Central Dispatch, won't this create a schism between
types of concurrent objects?