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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-08 18:27:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsrout1.ntli.net!news.ntli.net!newspeer1-win.server.ntli.net!newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: chris User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040208) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language) References: <87d66pyw1g.fsf@insalien.org> <406EEC35.7040109@noplace.com> <874qs0zvy1.fsf@insalien.org> <40714C98.90601@noplace.com> <1073gv22t969q5a@corp.supernews.com> <40729B9D.30906@noplace.com> <1076000ef5oj06f@corp.supernews.com> <0emdncWNfbOyUendRVn-gg@gbronline.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <5Ymdc.1511$pQ6.89@newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net> Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 02:29:04 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.107.63.68 X-Trace: newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net 1081473921 81.107.63.68 (Fri, 09 Apr 2004 01:25:21 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2004 01:25:21 GMT Organization: NTL Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6875 Date: 2004-04-09T02:29:04+01:00 List-Id: Vinzent 'Gadget' Hoefler wrote: > chris wrote: > > Yes. That's certainly true, if you have a big library and you can use > it, it can speed up your development. OTOH it could well be, that all > the time you just saved you will spend with debugging or even > searching for the appropriate library functions... ;) Maybe but I never find that in Java unless I'm using unfamiliar APIs like RMI and I don't develop in Java every day or even every week - ditto digging into the ARM for unfamiliar elements. I'm familiar with a lot of languages and use each as appropriate in personal work. Otherwise I just get on with it. > Don't get me wrong, I'd really like to the Ada Standard Container > Library in the next standard, but anything more than that... Which get's revised every ten years. Such a thing is better revised as required. Lumping it with the standard is a bad idea. > In fact, you can boil it all down to the famous saying: "Use the right > tool for the job." - If you're putting a GUI together, hell, yes, > stick with Java, Python or whatever. Use LabView if it's appropriate. > Even use C if the job you have to do isn't worth the effort to do it > right the first time. :-> Of course use the right tool for the right job. The point is people say they want Ada to become more popular and I'm assuming it's on the desktop and servers. All the discussions seem to suggest that. If it isn't then my mistake. Perhaps people should clarify their intent or perhaps stop trying to convince people to use the wrong tool for the job - if Ada is indeed the wrong tool for desktop development; I'm not saying it is or isn't. Marketting to the desktop involves developing applications and tools people want to use, not bugging everyone with productivity arguments that people largely ignore because they became immune to marketting hype of that type when everyone started yelling in the early 90's. Everyone in sw goes on about productivity and it's all subjective, so very few educated people listen to it (zealots and managers are a different kettle of fish). They make choices based on others they trusts' experience. There are no examples of desktop sw written in Ada for users outside the Ada community, only non-desktop sw in rockets and planes. > But - and that's just a note for my (and probably other ones) > boss(es), so please don't take it personally, Chris - get used to the > fact that even the so really cool and hyped Java is *not* the right > tool for a _lot_ of jobs. I never said anything about Java being the right tool for the given application, I just said it was a better option because things are available for it that are not available in Ada. Personally I'd write the server side stuff in Erlang and the client side stuff in Java. Indeed that's what I was doing. Ada wasn't considered for more than a few seconds, not because it wasn't a good language, not because I am not familiar with it - the opposite is true and Erlang is still a bit unnerving - but because it's too much hassle to go around looking for libs and build the missing ones. I never even said Java was the right tool for any job. C is not the right tool for any job IMO, yet people still use it today. It's just that Java is a better tool than Ada, not because of language details but because of it's level of support in the target application area. > Especially when it comes to the things where > Ada is really good at: real time and embedded applications and systems > with a long life (read: maintenance) time. When it comes to those I'd > say development in Ada outperforms anything I've seen yet. And I might use Ada there if that was the area of application at hand. I'm largely a desktop developer (with some interest in server development), so what does Ada as a package and a language offer me? > Sure, it's not too easy to click a crappy GUI together if you want to > do this in Ada, but that sort of development doesn't get a rocket to > fly to the moon, does it? No. Don't be rediculous. There's a world of difference between putting together a crappy GUI and testing for job schedulability in real time systems and everything else that goes on in such efforts. If that's your job and Ada is good for that, fine. It isn't my job - neithers plunking together crappy GUIs, any fool can do that (UIs should be the domain of UI designers) - and to use Ada makes sense only for a subset of the set of applications Ada is suitable for in this area. Chris