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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f5d71,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,304c86061dc69dba X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-02-09 18:26:33 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: msg1825@yahoo.com (MSG) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language) Date: 9 Feb 2004 18:26:33 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <54759e7e.0402091826.2847e0c@posting.google.com> References: <20040206174017.7E84F4C4114@lovelace.ada-france.org> <54759e7e.0402071124.322ea376@posting.google.com> <2460735.u7KiuvdgQP@linux1.krischik.com> <54759e7e.0402081525.50c7adae@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 156.111.84.180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1076379993 27491 127.0.0.1 (10 Feb 2004 02:26:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 02:26:33 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5376 comp.lang.c:21527 comp.lang.c++:18370 comp.lang.java:2819 Date: 2004-02-09T18:26:33-08:00 List-Id: Thanks very much to everyone for the interesting info. It made me look more closely at Ada. It looks like it is indeed one of the safest languages among the ones that aren't garbage collected, which probably makes it suitable for programming things like airplanes, etc.: 1. hard real-time 2. bug-averse 3. not very performance demanding (don't know about other compilers, but they say GNAT produces slow executables) However, it does not look like it's a good match for me, since my needs are the exact opposite: 1. no real time 2. bugs welcome (but not wrong results) - lusers will not come near my programs 3. performance is highly important James Rogers wrote in message news:... > Given the quite reasonable objections presented by some in the > cross-posted news-groups I would like to carry on this conversation > with you via email. My return email is valid. > > Jim Rogers