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: 2001-07-25 03:50:31 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: codesavvy@aol.com (codesavvy) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada The Best Language? Date: 25 Jul 2001 03:50:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5be89e2f.0107250250.2954154c@posting.google.com> References: <5be89e2f.0107170838.c71ad61@posting.google.com> <5be89e2f.0107180235.726d46a8@posting.google.com> <9j3rrd$g71$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net> <5be89e2f.0107181300.4b4e93d7@posting.google.com> <3B57195E.A3A3FED@home.com> <5be89e2f.0107191336.39376b9@posting.google.com> <3B5CE9D7.CB4AE34B@home.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.7.149.162 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 996058231 28251 127.0.0.1 (25 Jul 2001 10:50:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-support@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 Jul 2001 10:50:31 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10558 Date: 2001-07-25T10:50:31+00:00 List-Id: David Bolen wrote in message news:... I too found the 5 year old data to be non interesting and not convincing. I too found many broken links. > "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" writes: > > > The www.adaic.org site is a starting place. See: > > > > http://www.adaic.org/intro/c.html > > > > I am sure that others in this ng can give additional references, and in > > some cases testimonials ;-) > > Not to derail the better language discussion, but I'm not a current > Ada user and have been lurking for a bit here following the various > URLs and what not, and I was curious about one thing I noticed. > > I can't help but be struck by the fact that in almost all cases > (clearly there were a few exceptions), the various documents and > comparisions, and studies, and even some FAQs that I'm able to track > down all seem to be years old at this point (some over 5 years). > > The above URL is a good example. The topmost entry on the above > referenced page (with a banner of "NEW") is from early 1998. Nothing > in the news but a few conferences were later than 1999 and the current > issue of AdaIC news is Fall of 1997. And that seems more the rule > than the exception from my browsing. I've also hit more stray/broken > links on the Ada pages than I've seen in a long time. > > Now clearly there doesn't have to be any strong correlation between > such information and the language's viability itself, nor am I trying > to read too much into it, but I couldn't help but notice it, and it > just seemed strange that I didn't find more active, and more > importantly, recent, bits of information. > > Given that posters here clearly find use of the language in current, > commercial (not just military although that's obviously still true) > environments, is it just a poor net-presence language, or lack of > interest, or am I just looking in the wrong places? > > Thanks. > > -- > -- David