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: 103376,971aa11c293c3db1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-19 14:47:14 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: codesavvy@aol.com (codesavvy) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada The Best Language? Date: 19 Jul 2001 14:47:14 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5be89e2f.0107191347.4a38f590@posting.google.com> References: <3B59EE1C@MailAndNews.com> <5be89e2f.0107180606.7185b1cb@posting.google.com> <3B559E79.F21DBE5C@earthlink.net> <5be89e2f.0107181231.40bde882@posting.google.com> <3B55FFD5.9927BD6@san.rr.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.59.170.85 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 995579234 9398 127.0.0.1 (19 Jul 2001 21:47:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-support@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Jul 2001 21:47:14 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10285 Date: 2001-07-19T21:47:14+00:00 List-Id: Then Ada will be forever relegated to a fulfilling specific niches. I believe you'll see more organizations switching from Ada to C++ rather than the other way around. Darren New wrote in message news:<3B55FFD5.9927BD6@san.rr.com>... > > All this to put someone down. I suggest you read my post again and > > don't quote it out of context. It's very simple really, all one has > > to do is indicate some hard evidence that developers are significantly > > more productive with Ada 95 than say C++. Do you have anything > > besides your opinions? > > This is a bogus question. People have provided a list of areas in which > Ada makes programmers more productive than C++ does. For example, in the > areas of portable real-time systems, portable multithreaded code, > portable distributed programming, etc. > > There are other areas where Ada and C++ are approximately equivalent. > > Then you ask for hard evidence where Ada is superior to C++. Well, > nobody is going to do a study where portable distributed multitasking is > vital to success and code it in C++ and Ada just to see which works > better. That's just silly. > > Show me hard evidence that drawing pie charts in Excel is easier than > drawing pie charts by flogging the bits of the video card in raw C > without any libraries? What? No evidence out there? Then surely Excel's > no better than C for doing that. > > If your hypothetical managers aren't doing stuff where Ada is superior > to C++, then they might not get "sufficient" productivity increase out > of learning Ada as compared to knowing what they already know. So?