Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Rob]

BRIAN LANGENBERGER wrote:
>>While I've never done any significant programming in Ada (anyone know
of a good GNUada compiler? ;)  <<

as a matter of fact:  gnat

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[John Bode]

In article <34566fe9.447229@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
Black) wrote:

> You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
> C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.

C++?!?!  The COBOL of the Nineties (with apologies to COBOL)?  The most
God-awful kludge of a language in the history of Western civilization?  The
most complicated, un-object-oriented OOL?  A language with no standard,
conflicting goals, and inconsistent implementations?  A language where Herb
Schildt is just as likely to be right about a particular feature as anyone?

Question:  How object-oriented is a language that still relies on #include
files?

-- 
John Bode
one grumpy code monkey

"Paranoia is just reality on a finer scale" -- Strange Days

To email me directly, remove the 'nospam.' from my address.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[John Bode]

In article <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
Black) wrote:

> I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
> impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
> use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
> Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
> get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

My, what a *cute* little troll.  Just makes you want to grab a 2x4 and beat
the crap out of it, doesn't it?

-- 
John Bode
one grumpy code monkey

"Paranoia is just reality on a finer scale" -- Strange Days

To email me directly, remove the 'nospam.' from my address.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Dennis Weldy]

I wouldnt say he'c completely stupid. Really, we oughta thank him for
publicizing his approach to problem solving, particularly when he has
difficulties. This way, if y'see a resume cross your desk with the name
"John Black", you'll know where to file it ;-)

Dennis
Shayne Flint wrote in message <3455D9B2.38F0@ainslie-software.com>...
>John Black wrote:
>>
>> I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>> impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>> use this outdated piece of crap.
>
>I wouldn't usually react like this, but:
>
>If you had so much trouble with Ada you must be completely STUPID and
>USELESS!!
>
>Let this be the end of this thread.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>-- Shayne Flint, MIEAust, CPEng        shayne@ainslie-software.com
>-- Ainslie Software Pty Limited    http://www.ainslie-software.com
>--
>--      ShapeDB, a database and form drawing add-on for Visio
>------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Shayne Flint]

John Black wrote:
> 
> I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
> impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
> use this outdated piece of crap. 

I wouldn't usually react like this, but:

If you had so much trouble with Ada you must be completely STUPID and
USELESS!!

Let this be the end of this thread.

------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Shayne Flint, MIEAust, CPEng        shayne@ainslie-software.com 
-- Ainslie Software Pty Limited    http://www.ainslie-software.com
--
--      ShapeDB, a database and form drawing add-on for Visio
------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Adam Beneschan]

nospam@nospam (John Black) writes:
 
 >I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
 >impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
 >use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
 >Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
 >get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

I once heard of a computer language named TROLL; I have no idea what
it's like, but I think you should look into it.  I'll bet it's
something you'd really enjoy programming in.

                                -- Adam

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Tucker Taft]

BRIAN LANGENBERGER (lang0104@itlabs.umn.edu) wrote:

: While I've never done any significant programming in Ada (anyone know
: of a good GNUada compiler? ;)  

FWIW, there is a good GNUAda compiler, known as "GNAT"
(cf. www.gnat.com), which has, among others, real-live 
"GNU" folks as part of their development staff.

It has the usual download price of $0.00, with commercial support
contracts available from a company called "ACT" (analogous
to Cygnus for GCC).

There are also other freely-downloadable "personal" versions of 
Ada95 compilers as well; cf www.aonix.com and www.appletmagic.com.

--
-Tucker Taft   stt@inmet.com   http://www.inmet.com/~stt/
Intermetrics, Inc.  Burlington, MA  USA

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Steve Ropa]

On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Kenneth W. Sodemann wrote:

<snip very good points>
> 
> 4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
> more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
> done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
> so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
> of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
> maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.
> 
> Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
> environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
> time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
> job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
> for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
> not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).
> 

I hate to keep a thread going that started with such an inane comment(see
subject) but *your* points were very well articulated, and lead me to a
question.
As you said, it all boils down to the right tool for the right job.  What
types of jobs are Ada best suited for? I got into development through self
learning, so I never really had the benefit of experiencing a lot of
different languages.

Thanks
Steve

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Dann Corbit]

John Black wrote in message <34566fe9.447229@news.mindspring.com>...
>You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
>C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.
Boy, this is just great.  The "C or C++" thread was not good enough.  Now that
it has passed the previous world record for spam harvesting, we pull Ada and
Java into the mix.  Pretty please, down on my knees, I'm begging you to trim
comp.lang.c from the header when replying to this post.

I like Ada.  I like Java.  I like C.  I like C++.  I hate these inane threads.
Gargantuan avalanches of pseudo-information, opinions stated as facts, and
name calling.

Oh, goody.
--
C-FAQ ftp sites: ftp://ftp.eskimo.com ftp://rtfm.mit.edu
Hypertext C-FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-FAQ Book: ISBN 0-201-84519-9.
Want Software?  Algorithms?  Pubs? http://www.infoseek.com

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles R. Lyttle]

--------------108E80454C4234ACA219AC32
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Steve Ropa wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Kenneth W. Sodemann wrote:
>
> <snip very good points>
> >
> > 4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
> > more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
> > done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
> > so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
> > of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
> > maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.
> >
> > Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
> > environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
> > time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
> > job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
> > for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
> > not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).
> >
>
> I hate to keep a thread going that started with such an inane comment(see
> subject) but *your* points were very well articulated, and lead me to a
> question.
> As you said, it all boils down to the right tool for the right job.  What
> types of jobs are Ada best suited for? I got into development through self
> learning, so I never really had the benefit of experiencing a lot of
> different languages.
>
> Thanks
> Steve

I find Ada best for really big jobs (1_000_000 or more lines) with lots of formal
methodologies and a need for high reliability. I hope Java will fill the under
1_000_000 spot one day soon.

--

Russ Lyttle

email : lyttlec@mail.flash.net



--------------108E80454C4234ACA219AC32
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>
Steve Ropa wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Kenneth W. Sodemann wrote:

<P>&lt;snip very good points>
<BR>>
<BR>> 4.)&nbsp; Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have
been much
<BR>> more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I
have not
<BR>> done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written
in Java,
<BR>> so I cannot comment on that).&nbsp; Add to that the fact that for
certain types
<BR>> of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
<BR>> maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.
<BR>>
<BR>> Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a
lot better
<BR>> environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least
at this
<BR>> time).&nbsp; Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool
for the right
<BR>> job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the
right tool
<BR>> for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools
are
<BR>> not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).
<BR>>

<P>I hate to keep a thread going that started with such an inane comment(see
<BR>subject) but *your* points were very well articulated, and lead me
to a
<BR>question.
<BR>As you said, it all boils down to the right tool for the right job.&nbsp;
What
<BR>types of jobs are Ada best suited for? I got into development through
self
<BR>learning, so I never really had the benefit of experiencing a lot of
<BR>different languages.

<P>Thanks
<BR>Steve</BLOCKQUOTE>
I find Ada best for really big jobs (1_000_000 or more lines) with lots
of formal methodologies and a need for high reliability. I hope Java will
fill the under 1_000_000 spot one day soon.&nbsp;
<PRE>--&nbsp;

Russ Lyttle&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>&nbsp;
email : lyttlec@mail.flash.net</PRE>
&nbsp;</HTML>

--------------108E80454C4234ACA219AC32--

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Rob Eamon]

John Black wrote in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com>...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

This seems to be a fairly typical reaction by C/C++ programmers.
(And I don't mean this in a negative way.) The Ada syntax is
more verbose and tends to make those who are comfortable
with a terse language a little crazy. Also the strong type checking
will make a C/C++ programmer who is used to playing loose
and easy with pointers and casting pull their hair out.

Ada has some good features, including having multitasking
support built into the language. Ada is useful in many contexts,
but unless you had a specific reason for using Ada, it's not
surprising that you abandoned it for what you already know.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[BRIAN LANGENBERGER]

John Black (nospam@nospam) wrote:
: I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
: impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
: use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
: Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
: get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

While I've never done any significant programming in Ada (anyone know
of a good GNUada compiler? ;)  I wouldn't want it going away.
More programming languages mean more variety, and with the vast multitudes
of hardware availible (and, consequently, problems to be solved),
programmers need all the tools (i.e. languages) we can get.

I'd like to see more languages rather than less. 

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
forth...
>I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

1.)  Nice troll!!

2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
YOUR inability to grasp it.

3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
wizards?

4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.

Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
time).  Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[John Black]

I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[John Black]

You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[BRIAN LANGENBERGER]

John Black (nospam@nospam) wrote:
: You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
: C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.

If you wanted a progam to clean our your netscape cache every time
you logged-out, would you really write it in C++?  A shell script
seems like a better alternative to me.  What about a simple text
filter that turns newlines to spaces?  Regular C seems just fine
for that task.  

IMO, a real programmer wouldn't ignore potentially
useful programming languages any more than a real carpenter would
try building a house with only a screwdriver.

As long as the job gets done properly, who really cares what
language(s) was/were used?

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Alan E & Carmel J Brain]

Shayne Flint wrote:
> 
> John Black wrote:
> >
> > I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
> > impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
> > use this outdated piece of crap.
> 
> I wouldn't usually react like this, but:
> 
> If you had so much trouble with Ada you must be completely STUPID and
> USELESS!!
> 
> Let this be the end of this thread.

At the risk of contradicting you, Shayne, consider:

either this is a guy who finds

#include stdio.h
void main()
{
  printf("Hello World/n/n/n");
|

easy, neat, and generally "better" while

with TEXT_IO;
procedure MAIN is
begin
  TEXT_IO.PUT("Hello World")
  NEW_LINE(3);
end;

is impossibly hard, obsolete and "worse", XOR it's a troll. Given the
pre-pubescent "X sucks Y rules" header, you're right in either case.
-- 
aebrain@dynamite.com.au     <> <>    How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain|      xxxxx       Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia |  xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
 abrain@cs.adfa.oz.au  o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo     oo oo     oo  
                    By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Dale Stanbrough]

Mr John (I'm not going to reveal my secret identity) Black writes:

"Shombe, I feel your pain.  I'm embroiled in a Comparative Programming
 Language class where we have to program in Ada, and the thing is so
 impossible, I'm lucky to even get it to compile, never mind Constraint
 Errors."

Translation:

I'm so hopeless i can't even understand a few rules on how to program
a language.

"And why bother sweating over a language that nobody uses!?
 At least I know C++, and I can pick up Java relatively easily.
 Knowing Ada and Pascal are almost as useful as knowing outer space
 basket weaving."

Translation:

I'm so incapable of realising that another language may have other
points of view to present, that I'll claim it's useless.


Unbelievable!


Dale

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Philip Brashear]

In article <34566fe9.447229@news.mindspring.com>,
John Black <nospam@nospam> wrote:
>You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
>C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.


Remember the old Persian proverb:

He who knows and knows that he knows is wise -- follow him
He who knows and knows not that he knows is asleep -- waken him
He who knows not and knows that he knows not is a child -- teach him
He whos knows not and knows not that he knows not is a fool -- shun him

Which category does John fall into?

Phil Brashear
(14 years of Ada experience, including teaching it to college freshmen)

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[CodeRed]

Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote in message <34581F0D.533B@dynamite.com.au>...

>with TEXT_IO;
>procedure MAIN is
>begin
>  TEXT_IO.PUT("Hello World")
>  NEW_LINE(3);
>end;

He also wrote in another group that Ada and Pascal are hard to learn :)
Pascal is perhaps even easier (I know pascal pretty good, and Ada I'm
looking
to get into which is why I'm reading this newsgroup).  But Ada looks pretty
cool.

>is impossibly hard, obsolete and "worse", XOR it's a troll. Given the
>pre-pubescent "X sucks Y rules" header, you're right in either case.

Truth is, I've learned all major languages (and some not major) like:
Super Easy, Basic, Pascal, C, C++, Cobol, and Assembly (for x86).

I've found C and C++ to be very hard to be productive in, and Pascal to be
the
easiest to be productive in.  Truthfully, I liked ASM better then C++, but I
didn't
get into advanced things in either.  I'm definitly interested in adding Ada
to my
list though, so if you could, can you e-mail me a place to download an Ada
compiler for x86's?  (preferably Dos or Win95 because Linux was deleted
for lack of space).

Thank you, my e-mail is grivell@erols.com

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Adam Beneschan]

"Dann Corbit" <dcorbit@solutionsiq.com> writes:
 >John Black wrote in message <34566fe9.447229@news.mindspring.com>...
 >>You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
 >>C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.
 >Boy, this is just great.  The "C or C++" thread was not good enough.
 >Now that it has passed the previous world record for spam
 >harvesting, we pull Ada and Java into the mix.  Pretty please, down
 >on my knees, I'm begging you to trim comp.lang.c from the header
 >when replying to this post.

Not good enough.  Not *nearly* good enough.  I'm on my knees begging
you all to trim ALL the newsgroups from the header when responding.
In other words, send your responses to /dev/null.  This guy is just
interested in inciting anger, and responding just satisfies his desire
for attention.

                                -- Adam

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

Sorry about the multiple posts there.  Minor malfunction with either my news
reader, or the companies news server (it went down soon after).

--
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kenneth W. Sodemann]

Steve Ropa wrote ...
>
>I hate to keep a thread going that started with such an inane comment(see
>subject) but *your* points were very well articulated, and lead me to a
>question.
>As you said, it all boils down to the right tool for the right job.  What
>types of jobs are Ada best suited for?

Personally, all of the Ada based projects that I have worked on have been
real-time embedded avionics systems.  Ada is a very good language for use in
these projects since these type of projects tend to be:

o  Large scale -- many LOC, and many engineers
o  Mission (or in this case, life) critical
o  Maintained over several years.

Ada also allows low level access to the hardware, and produces efficient
object code, both of which are essential to those types of programs.

Having used two different Ada tools for Windows application development
(ObjectAda is one, the other is a soon to be released tool from a different
company), I would say that Ada would be a good fit for large scale
applications development also.  However, the tools are not quite "up to par"
with a product like VC++ yet, and it would be harder to find developers, so
for small to medium sized Windows development projects, VC++ or VB is
probably a better choice (IMHO).

 --
with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
    E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
    Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
    Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Alan Brain]

CodeRed wrote:


>  I'm definitly interested in adding Ada
> to my
> list though, so if you could, can you e-mail me a place to download an Ada
> compiler for x86's?  (preferably Dos or Win95 because Linux was deleted
> for lack of space).

try http://www.adahome.com

This has links to all sorts of useful places (like the Public Ada
Library which contains several free/shareware Ada compilers for DOS).
More to the point for newsgroups other than comp.lang.ada, it's a great
place to get to things like CMM, Mil-Std-498 (the base of IEEE
 standard on Software Life Cycle), Software Metrics et alia. Which are
good no matter what language you use.
 
-- 
Not the Australian Dairy Farmers Association,
   the Australian Defence Force Academy.
aebrain@dynamite.com.au abrain@cs.adfa.oz.au

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[John Gluth]

In article <MPG.ec1256665b68f1b98979d@news.primenet.com> Mike Copeland,
mrcope@primenet.com writes:
>Learning Ada should be considered an 
>educational experience, at best, because no one uses it.

Dang...what HAVE I been doing then, these past few years?

You ever fly on the 777?  The flight control system is in Ada.
If you land in Canada, their air traffic control system is (or will
be...not
sure if it's been delivered) in Ada.
We fly missiles with Ada.  Shoot 'em down with Ada, too...

But hey, I've never done an applet for the web in Ada, or anything else
important like that...

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz]

Adam Beneschan wrote:
> 
> I once heard of a computer language named TROLL; I have no idea what
> it's like, but I think you should look into it.  I'll bet it's
> something you'd really enjoy programming in.

Why? John sounds like a JOVIAL person, even if he does prefer the
"language that dares not speak its name".

-- 

                        Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
                        Senior Software SE

The values in from and reply-to are for the benefit of spammers:
reply to domain eds.com, user msustys1.smetz or to domain gsg.eds.com,
user smetz. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Jon S Anthony]

nospam@nospam (John Black) writes:

> You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
> C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.

Any particular reason why anyone should give one rat's ass for your
opinion?  Any reason why you "think" the whole world should be
subjected to your overly cross posted and empty opinion?

Maybe the thread title should be "Megalomaniacal idiots (such as John
Black) SUCK, Intelligent people with some discretion RULE."

/Jon

> 
> You guys say what you want but it's true.  ADA is good for nothing.
> C++, on the other hand, is the only language you need.

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Ed Muldoon]

You have been much too hard on John Black.  He is performing a valuable
service for all of us.  One John_Black_type (and he is a generic type,
although I'm sure he's uncomfortable about it) can easily provide
employment for two other people as they clean up the messes he leaves
behind.  This increases the demand for our services and drives up our
incomes.  In the end, we all owe a lot to the John_Black_type. 

WARNING: Too many instantiations of the John_Black_type in a company can
lead to serious financial difficulties for that company.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Ken Mays]

Hi,

Fact is to ask yourself if it is worth the trouble. I learned Ada83
(college) and Ada95 (self-taught). There are jobs out there for Ada
programmers-if that is what you want to do. Now, what is it you want to do
after you learn the language? This is where a lot of minds falls short.
People don't know why they are learning the language in the first place or
what to do with it.

Ada is used in government software projects and avionics. Its background is
in
using it for embedded systems programming (think of the software that is
used in your
Microwave oven's control panel or digital watches). Its nature was that you
can look at the code and easily figure out what its doing or maintain it in
the future. Well, don't know how TRUE that is but I hope you get the idea.
Ada95 strength is its ability to use tasking (multitasking). You only learn
this is advanced C/C++ courses (depends).

Java is the web's language for interactive programming using browsers. It
was designed for that. Ada95 and C/C++ were not designed (by default) for
that. Here we go comparing an apple to a banana. Both are fruit, but have
their own characteristics.
A software engineer would only use Java for web development (mainly),
embedded system programming, or where it seems to make sense.

C/C++ strength is its knowledge base of software developers and industry
support.
If you want a job, just learn C/C++ and x86 assembly language. You can go
through college learning only those courses and geometry. Its a no brainer.
Java can also be done this way or any other major language used in your
area. But C/C++ is one of the MOST popular and supported computer
languages-which allows you to work just about anywhere. Its actually the
language that a lot of other languages were developed in.

If you were to ask me my top languages to know I would say Visual Basic,
C/C++ and Java. You'll find jobs in almost all of the popular languages (or
just pick up a newspaper and look at the jobs section). Hell, Visual Basic 5
would do you well. MicroSoft actually uses this for many of their GUI
programming projects!!!

Before I get flamed, I do advocate Ada95. Just that clients tend to look for
the languages I named. There is a war going on getting people to use Ada95
over C/C++ since there is a tremendous amount of time-tested applications
and programming libraries in C/C++ over Ada95. A no brainer.

Ken Mays, Systems Engineer
SAIC @Yourservice
http://www.yourservice.net
http://www.saic.com

P.S. If I asked you to find me ten Ada programmers and ten C programmers in
an hour
within you city before its destroyed...who do you think you'll find first?

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles R. Lyttle]

Ken Mays wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Fact is to ask yourself if it is worth the trouble. I learned Ada83
> (college) and Ada95 (self-taught). There are jobs out there for Ada
> programmers-if that is what you want to do. Now, what is it you want to do
> after you learn the language? This is where a lot of minds falls short.
> People don't know why they are learning the language in the first place or
> what to do with it.
>
> Ada is used in government software projects and avionics. Its background is
> in
> using it for embedded systems programming (think of the software that is
> used in your
> Microwave oven's control panel or digital watches). Its nature was that you
> can look at the code and easily figure out what its doing or maintain it in
> the future. Well, don't know how TRUE that is but I hope you get the idea.
> Ada95 strength is its ability to use tasking (multitasking). You only learn
> this is advanced C/C++ courses (depends).
>
> Java is the web's language for interactive programming using browsers. It
> was designed for that. Ada95 and C/C++ were not designed (by default) for
> that. Here we go comparing an apple to a banana. Both are fruit, but have
> their own characteristics.
> A software engineer would only use Java for web development (mainly),
> embedded system programming, or where it seems to make sense.
>
> C/C++ strength is its knowledge base of software developers and industry
> support.
> If you want a job, just learn C/C++ and x86 assembly language. You can go
> through college learning only those courses and geometry. Its a no brainer.
> Java can also be done this way or any other major language used in your
> area. But C/C++ is one of the MOST popular and supported computer
> languages-which allows you to work just about anywhere. Its actually the
> language that a lot of other languages were developed in.
>
> If you were to ask me my top languages to know I would say Visual Basic,
> C/C++ and Java. You'll find jobs in almost all of the popular languages (or
> just pick up a newspaper and look at the jobs section). Hell, Visual Basic 5
> would do you well. MicroSoft actually uses this for many of their GUI
> programming projects!!!
>
> Before I get flamed, I do advocate Ada95. Just that clients tend to look for
> the languages I named. There is a war going on getting people to use Ada95
> over C/C++ since there is a tremendous amount of time-tested applications
> and programming libraries in C/C++ over Ada95. A no brainer.
>
> Ken Mays, Systems Engineer
> SAIC @Yourservice
> http://www.yourservice.net
> http://www.saic.com
>
> P.S. If I asked you to find me ten Ada programmers and ten C programmers in
> an hour
> within you city before its destroyed...who do you think you'll find first?

 If you learned Ada and can write good Ada programs, you learned proper
programming. You are now permitted to call yourself a programmer and write
readable c/c++ programs. Anyone who says "I am a C/C++ programmer" or "I am a
Windows Programmer" or "I am an Ada programmer" isn't any kind of programmer.
For real programmers all this "My language can beat your language" is trash.
--

Russ Lyttle

email : lyttlec@mail.flash.net

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Bernard J. Girardot]

John Gluth wrote:
> 
> In article <MPG.ec1256665b68f1b98979d@news.primenet.com> Mike Copeland,
> mrcope@primenet.com writes:
> >Learning Ada should be considered an
> >educational experience, at best, because no one uses it.
> 
> Dang...what HAVE I been doing then, these past few years?
> 
> You ever fly on the 777?  The flight control system is in Ada.
> If you land in Canada, their air traffic control system is (or will
> be...not
> sure if it's been delivered) in Ada.
> We fly missiles with Ada.  Shoot 'em down with Ada, too...
> 
> But hey, I've never done an applet for the web in Ada, or anything else
> important like that...

HEY!  Ada works great as a CGI back end (and I think my code is pretty
important!)

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[NOSPAM_f93-eaa]

Charles R. Lyttle <lyttlec@flash.net> wrote:

>For real programmers all this "My language can beat your language" is trash.

I disagree. In general, Eiffel is far superior to C++ as a language, for
example. Sadly, C++ has gained more industry acceptance, and thus it has
more tools, compilers e t c. MS-DOS also gained more acceptance than NeXT
Step, but MS-DOS was, in general, inferior to NeXT Step.

-- 

Erik Alapaeae
email: NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se 

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles R. Lyttle]

NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se wrote:

> Charles R. Lyttle <lyttlec@flash.net> wrote:
>
> >For real programmers all this "My language can beat your language" is trash.
>
> I disagree. In general, Eiffel is far superior to C++ as a language, for
> example. Sadly, C++ has gained more industry acceptance, and thus it has
> more tools, compilers e t c. MS-DOS also gained more acceptance than NeXT
> Step, but MS-DOS was, in general, inferior to NeXT Step.
>
> --
>
> Erik Alapaeae
> email: NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se

As you know about Eiffel, you are probably one of the more experienced people.
Please understand that I am really talking to the newer guys.

I do hope that Eiffel and Java win out and C++ dies a well deserved death. But
in some cases, even though C++ is not as robust (big laugh) as Eiffel, it is
often the choice for the reasons you stated.  If life safety is involved Eiffel
or Ada are the only way to go. If low up-front cost is the ruling factor, then
C++ under some MS operating system is about the only thing available.  Be
flexible, learn more than one language, and do software engineering instead of
"programming".

--

Russ Lyttle

email : lyttlec@mail.flash.net

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Supreme]

I understand your frustration. John I am a student who is in his second
year of programming in Ada adn I am very frustrated with it. But I am
willing to give Ada a chance if I can get some real world expericence
with it .Any info on that out there ?


John Black wrote:

> I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
> impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
> use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
> Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
> get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[David A. Frantz]

Charles R. Lyttle wrote in message <345B7A48.F32E4924@flash.net>...
>NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se wrote:
>
>> Charles R. Lyttle <lyttlec@flash.net> wrote:
>>
>> >For real programmers all this "My language can beat your language" is
trash.
>>
>> I disagree. In general, Eiffel is far superior to C++ as a language, for
>> example. Sadly, C++ has gained more industry acceptance, and thus it has
>> more tools, compilers e t c. MS-DOS also gained more acceptance than NeXT
>> Step, but MS-DOS was, in general, inferior to NeXT Step.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Erik Alapaeae
>> email: NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se
>
>As you know about Eiffel, you are probably one of the more experienced
people.
>Please understand that I am really talking to the newer guys.
>
>I do hope that Eiffel and Java win out and C++ dies a well deserved death.
But
>in some cases, even though C++ is not as robust (big laugh) as Eiffel, it
is
>often the choice for the reasons you stated.  If life safety is involved
Eiffel
>or Ada are the only way to go. If low up-front cost is the ruling factor,
then
>C++ under some MS operating system is about the only thing available.  Be
>flexible, learn more than one language, and do software engineering instead
of
>"programming".
>
>--
>
>Russ Lyttle
>
>email : lyttlec@mail.flash.net
>
>
>
I would agree that to achieve low up front cost a microsoft platform would
have to be chosen.   But C++ has as many problems there as anywhere else why
not choose Visual Basic for a Win * platform.

dave

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Nick Leaton]

Charles R. Lyttle wrote:
> 
> NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se wrote:
> 
> > Charles R. Lyttle <lyttlec@flash.net> wrote:
> >
> > >For real programmers all this "My language can beat your language" is trash.
> >
> > I disagree. In general, Eiffel is far superior to C++ as a language, for
> > example. Sadly, C++ has gained more industry acceptance, and thus it has
> > more tools, compilers e t c. MS-DOS also gained more acceptance than NeXT
> > Step, but MS-DOS was, in general, inferior to NeXT Step.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Erik Alapaeae
> > email: NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se
> 
> As you know about Eiffel, you are probably one of the more experienced people.
> Please understand that I am really talking to the newer guys.
> 
> I do hope that Eiffel and Java win out and C++ dies a well deserved death. But
> in some cases, even though C++ is not as robust (big laugh) as Eiffel, it is
> often the choice for the reasons you stated.  If life safety is involved Eiffel
> or Ada are the only way to go. If low up-front cost is the ruling factor, then
> C++ under some MS operating system is about the only thing available.  Be
> flexible, learn more than one language, and do software engineering instead of
> "programming".

http://www.eiffel.com/products/linux/index.html

At least one vendor of Eiffel compilers provides a low up-front cost at
$69.95
or ($99.95 with all the manuals and CD).  This is for personal non
corporate use, and is not crippled.

-- 

Nick

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[vonhend]

In <jfbode-ya023380002810972146390001@news.earthlink.net>, jfbode@nospam.mail.earthlink.net (John Bode) writes:
>In article <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com>, nospam@nospam (John
>Black) wrote:
>
>> I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
>> impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
>> use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
>> Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
>> get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.
>
>My, what a *cute* little troll.  Just makes you want to grab a 2x4 and beat
>the crap out of it, doesn't it?
>
>-- 
>John Bode
>one grumpy code monkey
>
>"Paranoia is just reality on a finer scale" -- Strange Days
>
>To email me directly, remove the 'nospam.' from my address.

Concur.  Wouldn't it be nice if there were a way to keep the children
off the newsgroup until they grow up.

Mark Von Hendy

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Guest]

The question is not if you like or not a thing. I myself prefer C++, but
I respect other people, and think that your article is very rude and
ignorant. If you hate Ada, ignore its newsgroup. Simple, isn't it?

Best wishes,

Gabor Varga

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Michael Stark]

John Gluth wrote:
> 
> In article <MPG.ec1256665b68f1b98979d@news.primenet.com> Mike Copeland,
> mrcope@primenet.com writes:
> >Learning Ada should be considered an
> >educational experience, at best, because no one uses it.
> 
> Dang...what HAVE I been doing then, these past few years?
> 
> You ever fly on the 777?  The flight control system is in Ada.
> If you land in Canada, their air traffic control system is (or will
> be...not
> sure if it's been delivered) in Ada.
> We fly missiles with Ada.  Shoot 'em down with Ada, too...
> 
> But hey, I've never done an applet for the web in Ada, or anything else
> important like that...
Oh, but I have (well, actually the applet is Ada application code 
compiled w/ AppletMagic and Java GUI code).  Check

http://fdd.gsfc.nasa.gov/orb_prop/version2/orbit_propagator.html

if you want to look at the ground tracks of actual satellites or 
play with orbit parameters of your own.  Yeah, it's a toy program,
but we are looking at doing larger programs in Java and by compiling
existing Ada into Java.

However, John's point about the superiority of Ada in safety critical
systems (I am infering that is the point ;) is well taken.  But Ada can
do so much more -- I've used it for over 10 years without doing anything
safety critical, and still prefer it to the other languages I've used
professionally (although now I'm back in school I'm having fun w/ LISP, 
but I wouldn't want to implement 777 flight software in it ;)


Mike
-- 
Michael Stark
Goddard Research & Study Fellow
University of Maryland, College Park
e-mail: mstark@cs.umd.edu
"The beautiful thing about learning is that
 nobody can take it away from you" -- B.B. King
http://fdd.gsfc.nasa.gov/orb_prop/version2/orbit_propagator.html

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Alan E & Carmel J Brain]

Supreme wrote:
> 
> I understand your frustration. John I am a student who is in his second
> year of programming in Ada adn I am very frustrated with it. But I am
> willing to give Ada a chance if I can get some real world expericence
> with it .Any info on that out there ?

Any problems in particular?

The following is a bit of a plug, but may just help you:

http://www.adfa.oz.au/CS/student-info/ada/index.html

This contains the Ada lecture notes for the CS1 course here at ADFA
(Australian Defence Force Academy). Are they perfect? Nope. But they're
not too bad, and have heaps of examples (even if the style is not that
great IMHO - I hope to help 'better' it soon).

If your problems are not covered by the above URL, drop me a line, and
I'll give you as much help as I can (just like I do to my own students).

-- 
aebrain@dynamite.com.au     <> <>    How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain|      xxxxx       Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia |  xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
 abrain@cs.adfa.oz.au  o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo     oo oo     oo  
                    By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[John Stevens]

On Sat, 01 Nov 1997 12:51:53 -0600, Charles R. Lyttle <lyttlec@flash.net> wrote:
>NOSPAM_f93-eaa@sm.luth.se wrote:
>[nsippage]
>
>If low up-front cost is the ruling factor, then
>C++ under some MS operating system is about the only thing available.

I beg to differ.  C/C++ on Linux/FreeBSD/NetBSD is a much better choice,
especially is low up-front cost is the ruling factor. . . ;->

>Be
>flexible, learn more than one language, and do software engineering instead of
>"programming".

Sort of like what I tell my students: learning C++ doesn't make you an
object oriented programmer.  Learning the OOP paradigm, however, will
make it childishly simple to write in whatever OOPL you choose for the
current project.  It becomes a simple matter of translation from design to
language specific syntax, at that point.

John S.

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Boyd Roberts]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 743 bytes --]


In article <slrn6622r0.91f.jstevens@samoyed.ftc.nrcs.usda.gov>, jstevens@samoyed.ftc.nrcs.usda.gov (John Stevens) writes:
>Sort of like what I tell my students: learning C++ doesn't make you an
>object oriented programmer.  Learning the OOP paradigm, however, will
>make it childishly simple to write in whatever OOPL you choose for the
>current project.  It becomes a simple matter of translation from design to
>language specific syntax, at that point.

Simple matter of syntax?  You are living in a dream world.

Say the design calls for a feature the language does not have?

-- 
Boyd Roberts <boyd@france3.fr>			UTM N 31 447109 5411310

En fin, bon, bref, si tu veux, point � la ligne, voil� quoi -- Jacques

SPAT: gpg@t-1net.com

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Kaz Kylheku]

In article <63usl7$hqo$7@route1.mdrf.france3.fr>,
Boyd Roberts <boyd@france3.fr> wrote:
>In article <slrn6622r0.91f.jstevens@samoyed.ftc.nrcs.usda.gov>, jstevens@samoyed.ftc.nrcs.usda.gov (John Stevens) writes:
>>Sort of like what I tell my students: learning C++ doesn't make you an
>>object oriented programmer.  Learning the OOP paradigm, however, will
>>make it childishly simple to write in whatever OOPL you choose for the
>>current project.  It becomes a simple matter of translation from design to
>>language specific syntax, at that point.
>
>Simple matter of syntax?  You are living in a dream world.
>
>Say the design calls for a feature the language does not have?

It then could be that the design contains inappropriate implementation details
rather than focusing on abstractions and their relationships.

Or it could be that the language simply does genuinely lack a way to express
these abstractions and relationships: e.g.  your detailed design calls for
multiple inheritance and you don't have it in the language.
-- 
"In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's C programs should be
indented six feet downward and covered with dirt."
	-- Blair P. Houghton

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles W. Johnson]

On Sun, 2 Nov 1997 17:23:51 -0500, David A. Frantz proclaimed that:

[snip]

> I would agree that to achieve low up front cost a microsoft platform would
> have to be chosen.   But C++ has as many problems there as anywhere else why
> not choose Visual Basic for a Win * platform.

[snip]

There are several reasons why I do not consider VB to be an acceptable
development platform. To list a few:

1) The language is in no way standardized; those new language "features"
that M$ proclaims with every release are only new hacks to a language
that in so little resembles standard BASIC that it can easily be argued
that it is only called BASIC for marketting purposes.

2) VB inherits a freeform nature from BASIC that unsuitable for
writing large, maintainable projects. Last I checked VB does not even
require you to declare variables and their types (although Option
Explicit allows you to require this on a module-by-module
basis). While it has a (very) primitive exception handling mechanism
(ON ERROR), said is little more than an advanced GOSUB. So ad
infinitum.

3) Unless I am mistaken, VB does not support the concept of pointers
or variable references, so it fails to even be capable of expressing
basic dynamic data structures which are covered in a second year
Fundamentals of Computer Science course.

There are many, many options available compilers for Wintel platforms,
and if you are willing to put aside market monoliths like C++, I would
suggest that there are many solutions available which are far superior
to VB.

-- 
[Charles W. Johnson <cwj2@eskimo.com> - http://www.eskimo.com/~cwj2]
|    Heathen@Undernet (there is a Heathen@Dalnet. I am not he.)    |
|<BriceW:#atheism> Is this where you gfo instaed of Church?!       |
[                 My opinions are mine alone. Duh.                 ]

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles R. Lyttle]

Charles W. Johnson wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Nov 1997 17:23:51 -0500, David A. Frantz proclaimed that:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I would agree that to achieve low up front cost a microsoft platform would
> > have to be chosen.   But C++ has as many problems there as anywhere else why
> > not choose Visual Basic for a Win * platform.
>
> [snip]
>
> There are several reasons why I do not consider VB to be an acceptable
> development platform. To list a few:
>
> 1) The language is in no way standardized; those new language "features"
> that M$ proclaims with every release are only new hacks to a language
> that in so little resembles standard BASIC that it can easily be argued
> that it is only called BASIC for marketting purposes.
>
> 2) VB inherits a freeform nature from BASIC that unsuitable for
> writing large, maintainable projects. Last I checked VB does not even
> require you to declare variables and their types (although Option
> Explicit allows you to require this on a module-by-module
> basis). While it has a (very) primitive exception handling mechanism
> (ON ERROR), said is little more than an advanced GOSUB. So ad
> infinitum.
>
> 3) Unless I am mistaken, VB does not support the concept of pointers
> or variable references, so it fails to even be capable of expressing
> basic dynamic data structures which are covered in a second year
> Fundamentals of Computer Science course.
>
> There are many, many options available compilers for Wintel platforms,
> and if you are willing to put aside market monoliths like C++, I would
> suggest that there are many solutions available which are far superior
> to VB.
>
> --
> [Charles W. Johnson <cwj2@eskimo.com> - http://www.eskimo.com/~cwj2]
> |    Heathen@Undernet (there is a Heathen@Dalnet. I am not he.)    |
> |<BriceW:#atheism> Is this where you gfo instaed of Church?!       |
> [                 My opinions are mine alone. Duh.                 ]

 In the "quick and dirty" realm, I have seen some pretty good VB programs. I
think plain ol' basic Basic would have been just as functional for this class of
programs, but...
VB has its niche, if it stays there.

--

Russ Lyttle

email : lyttlec@mail.flash.net

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles W. Kann]

Boyd Roberts (boyd@france3.fr) wrote:
: In article <slrn6622r0.91f.jstevens@samoyed.ftc.nrcs.usda.gov>, jstevens@samoyed.ftc.nrcs.usda.gov (John Stevens) writes:
: >Sort of like what I tell my students: learning C++ doesn't make you an
: >object oriented programmer.  Learning the OOP paradigm, however, will
: >make it childishly simple to write in whatever OOPL you choose for the
: >current project.  It becomes a simple matter of translation from design to
: >language specific syntax, at that point.

: Simple matter of syntax?  You are living in a dream world.

: Say the design calls for a feature the language does not have?

This is too true.  Many authors now advocate "designing to an interface",
for example Design Patterns by Gamma, et al, or any of the recent books
by Coad and Mayfield.  It can be done in C++, it is just clunky.  But
because Ada made the decision that there is never a reason to use
multiple inheritence, I have never been able to figure out a way to
write general purpose programs which use an interface like construct.
I would love to hear if someone has (and Generics don't count.  They
are backwards and non-dynamic.  And neither does the stupid "alias
type" field in a record which is advocated by AdaMagic.  Talk about
a KLUDGE, it was never even checked when I used it).

Many researchers believe that language greatly influences how programmers
generate code, even when things can be done one of several languages.  There
are papers by Thomas Green, Simon Davis, Rachael Belamy, David Gilmore,
and more that show, for simple programs and constructs, that the type type
of program developed depends on the language.  And I am personally convinced
that if you need to change your best model of your program to 
match the language, you will nearly always end up with a less good program.

That said, I believe you should learn many programming languages and
ways to develop a program so you have many more ways to view a program,
and more tools to use when implementing it.  Which is my argument for
teaching Ada, Java, C++, Eiffel, Prolog, and LISP (minimally) in any
real Computer Science curriculum.

My 2 cents worth.

--
chuck kann
ckann@seas.gwu.edu

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Jon S Anthony]

ckann@seas.gwu.edu (Charles W. Kann) writes:

> because Ada made the decision that there is never a reason to use
> multiple inheritence,

Actually, all that was decided was there was no reasonably agreed upon
definition of how MI works in all the various OOLs that have it.  This
led to a decision to provide building blocks to allow the programmer
to build whatever version he thought was "correct".

Personally, I think MI is a complete goof wrt any modeling effort and
"should" be avoided if at all possible.  In some implementation
vehicles you can't avoid it as it is the only multi-view combinator
you have.


> I have never been able to figure out a way to write general purpose
> programs which use an interface like construct.

Such as?  By far the most common use of MI is as a kludge to implement
mixin behavior.  You get this cleanly and simply in Ada95 with SI and
generic mixins.


> I would love to hear if someone has (and Generics don't count.  They

Yes, of course.  Please feel free to give a case where MI as
implemented in C++ (from the NG list I assume you think C++ is it as
Java does not have MI either) is really necessary.

If you want something that is really useful, you might better think
along the lines of multiple dispatch and generic functions ala' CLOS.


> are backwards and non-dynamic.  And neither does the stupid "alias
> type" field in a record which is advocated by AdaMagic.  Talk about
> a KLUDGE, it was never even checked when I used it).

This is really a _view_ capability.  IMO, views are far more
expressive and consistent than MI.  You can say that the mechanism
provided for this is "nutsy boltsy", but it is not a kludge per se.
Shrug.


> Many researchers believe that language greatly influences how programmers
...

Right.

> that if you need to change your best model of your program to match
> the language, you will nearly always end up with a less good
> program.

More or less agree.


> That said, I believe you should learn many programming languages and
> ways to develop a program so you have many more ways to view a program,
> and more tools to use when implementing it.  Which is my argument for
> teaching Ada, Java, C++, Eiffel, Prolog, and LISP (minimally) in any
> real Computer Science curriculum.

My only "disagreement" here would be the "minimally" tag on Lisp.
While it has problems like anything else, IMO it is by far the most
expressive and flexible of all those listed.

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Marc Wachowitz]

kennel@nospam.lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)) wrote:
> I think it's perfectly OK to admit most of the truth that there was no clean
> way to do MI in a language which included most of Ada83 and its module
> system as an intellectual base.

Nothing against admitting this in case it truly was the reason, but I
don't see why it would be true. In fact, off the top of my head I could
think of several different approaches to integrating MI - be it multiple
interface inheritance with single code inheritance, or full multiple
code inheritance - with "OO-less Ada95". Of course, different people's
interpretations of what "clean" means in our context vary considerably.

I wouldn't like to try and please a fanatic "OO-purist" (bad misnomer,
but established by a bad tradition) who will only accept something as
"clean OO" if it looks pretty much like his beloved programming language
(be that Self or Smalltalk or Eiffel or Common Lisp's object system or
whatever else), but given what I'd expect about someone who generally
likes Ada (particularly its emphasis on readability and explicitness
vs. ease/compactness of writing, and the freedom to chose among design
alternatives), I think it would have been possible to find something
consistent with these tendencies and workable in practice. Basically I'd
go for a delegation-like model, where overriding is only possible with
the routines marked as such, and the decision whether or not to override
something must be explicit, such that with every subtype there's a list
of all available methods; thus any new method in a supertype would trigger
the need in subtypes to consider whether that new method would be used as
provided, or redefined, or that particular subtyping ceases to make sense.
Another approach would be to establish messages as declarations in their
own right, not inherently associated with types, and then define subtyping
as relation on the set of handled messages, where again handlers would be
required to be explicit. This way one could avoid name clashes or repeated
inheritance, not having to make up complicated solutions for problems which
don't occur in the first place. The design space is really quite large,
much richer than only the more popular models of Java, C++ or Eiffel.

My impression is indeed that the Ada language-design tradition tends to
be conservative about inventing unconventional "big models" - like some
very unusual form of OO - but will rather provide well-established features
(perhaps combined in a way which was previously not common) and building
blocks - which can be used in lots of different situations - for a variety
of designs, and I have no reasons to doubt that the original description
why MI was left out is true.

-- Marc Wachowitz <mw@ipx2.rz.uni-mannheim.de>

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Matt Kennel (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)]

On 10 Nov 1997 19:05:30 -0500, Jon S Anthony <jsa@synquiry.com> wrote:
:ckann@seas.gwu.edu (Charles W. Kann) writes:
:
:> because Ada made the decision that there is never a reason to use
:> multiple inheritence,
:
:Actually, all that was decided was there was no reasonably agreed upon
:definition of how MI works in all the various OOLs that have it.

:This
:led to a decision to provide building blocks to allow the programmer
:to build whatever version he thought was "correct".

But that's yet another definition of how "MI works".

Did the Ada designers shy away from choosing one particular module scheme
because "there was no reasonably agreed upon definition of how modules ought
to work"?  Ditto for exceptions.

Ans: no.  

:> I have never been able to figure out a way to write general purpose
:> programs which use an interface like construct.
:
:Such as?  By far the most common use of MI is as a kludge to implement
:mixin behavior.  You get this cleanly and simply in Ada95 with SI and
:generic mixins.

Explain the kludginess of of "mixins" done, say with Sather or Eiffel.

(what's a generic mixin?)

I think it's perfectly OK to admit most of the truth that there was no clean
way to do MI in a language which included most of Ada83 and its module
system as an intellectual base.

-- 
*        Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD           
*
* According to California Assembly Bill 3320, it is now a criminal offense
* to solicit any goods or services by email to a CA resident without
* providing the business's legal name and complete street address. 
*

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Charles W. Kann]

: :> I have never been able to figure out a way to write general purpose
: :> programs which use an interface like construct.
: :
: :Such as?  By far the most common use of MI is as a kludge to implement
: :mixin behavior.  You get this cleanly and simply in Ada95 with SI and
: :generic mixins.

When I posted this, I was talking about "interface".  Look it up in Java.
It isn't "mixins".  It is clean, dynamic, straight forward, and very easy
to understand.  "interface" was one of the best ideas in Java.  Everytime
I mention this to an Ada person, they always try to make it like "you can
do everything in Ada, so this has to be there".  The most common thing Ada
people tell me is to look at Generics.  I know Generics, and it has nothing
to do with the concept of an "interface".  It is: 1 - static, and 
2 - backwards.  

If there is an easy way to create the equivalent of an "interface" in
Ada, I would love to see it.  It can be done (if you are careful) in C++,
or any language with Virtual functions, Abstract classes, AND multiple
inheritence.  I am not putting down Ada, but it isn't the answer to every
problem, and regardless of what some Ada advocates might say, Ada 95 made 
(alot) of bad design decisions.  Protected types (the implementation, the
idea was great), object allocation, inheritence are just a few bad decisions.

--
chuck kann
ckann@seas.gwu.edu

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Jon S Anthony]

ckann@seas.gwu.edu (Charles W. Kann) writes:

> : :> I have never been able to figure out a way to write general purpose
> : :> programs which use an interface like construct.
> : :
> : :Such as?  By far the most common use of MI is as a kludge to implement
> : :mixin behavior.  You get this cleanly and simply in Ada95 with SI and
> : :generic mixins.
> 
> When I posted this, I was talking about "interface".  Look it up in Java.

Yeah, I already know about Java interfaces.


> It isn't "mixins".  It is clean, dynamic, straight forward, and very
> easy to understand.  "interface" was one of the best ideas in Java.

OK, yeah, that sounds about right.


> The most common thing Ada people tell me is to look at Generics.  I
> know Generics, and it has nothing to do with the concept of an
> "interface".  It is: 1 - static, and 2 - backwards.

I think the real issue here is clarity.  You may have been intending
to talk about "interface" as in Java interface, but you didn't
communicate that.  At least not well enough for me to catch what you
meant to say.

 
> If there is an easy way to create the equivalent of an "interface" in
> Ada, I would love to see it.  It can be done (if you are careful) in C++,
> or any language with Virtual functions, Abstract classes, AND multiple

Well yes you can.  It seems odd that you would even suggest that you
"can't".  Is it _clean_?  Well, IMO not particularly.  For some
reasonable details see Tucker Taft's _Programming the Internet in Ada
95_:

http://www.inmet.com/~stt/adajava_paper/

This mapping technique is how one Ada=>Java implementation handles
Java interfaces - going in both directions.  The idiom is simplified
for the AdaJava user via a new interface (Ada sense) convention:
Java_Interface.  This let's the compiler do some of the rubbish you'd
have to do by hand if just using the idiom in out of the box Ada95.


> inheritence.  I am not putting down Ada, but it isn't the answer to
> every problem, and regardless of what some Ada advocates might say,

I have no problem putting Ada "down".  I've done it many times.  Just
be _clear_ about what the actual technical issues are _and_ make a
decent argument for it.  Don't just assert it.  Well, you can do that
to, just don't be surprised if no one pays much attention.

/Jon

-- 
Jon Anthony
Synquiry Technologies, Ltd., Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383
"Nightmares - Ha!  The way my life's been going lately,
 Who'd notice?"  -- Londo Mollari

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[Brian Rogoff]

On 11 Nov 1997, Charles W. Kann wrote:
> When I posted this, I was talking about "interface".  Look it up in Java.
> It isn't "mixins".  It is clean, dynamic, straight forward, and very easy
> to understand.  "interface" was one of the best ideas in Java.  Everytime
> I mention this to an Ada person, they always try to make it like "you can
> do everything in Ada, so this has to be there".  The most common thing Ada
> people tell me is to look at Generics.  I know Generics, and it has nothing
> to do with the concept of an "interface".  It is: 1 - static, and 
> 2 - backwards.  

	I have no idea in what sense you think (Ada) generics are
"backward", but they do not model the dynamic aspects of Java interfaces. 
They can be used like ML signatures, but to do Java interfaces you have 
to use the secret technique hidden away in the unavailable document, the
"Ada 95 Rationale", which can be found easily at www.adahome.com. If you 
look at 4.6.3 you'll find exactly what you need. 

> 
> If there is an easy way to create the equivalent of an "interface" in
> Ada, I would love to see it.  It can be done (if you are careful) in C++,
> or any language with Virtual functions, Abstract classes, AND multiple
> inheritence.

	It certainly isn't as syntactically convenient as Java interfaces
(or Sather abstract types) but I find Ada's OO component usable, and its non-OO 
facilities like hierarchical modules and powerful generics more than make
up for its conservative OO approach. All IMO, of course. 

-- Brian

Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!!

[tbb03ar]

On Tue, 28 Oct 1997, Kenneth W. Sodemann wrote:

> John Black, in message <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> spewed
> forth...
> >I have tried and tried to program with Ada, but it is downright
> >impossible.  I just don't see how anyone could - or would want to -
> >use this outdated piece of crap.  It's back to C++ and Java for me.
> >Hopefully Ada and other languages will go the way of the dinosaur and
> >get hit by a meteor, disappearing from the face of the earth.
> 
> 1.)  Nice troll!!
> 
> 2.)  I find it interesting that YOU fail, and then blame the language for
> YOUR inability to grasp it.
> 
> 3.)  It is admirable that you are able to come out and let everyone know
> that you are incapable of adapting to a new language, even though I cannot
> think of anything you can do in the other languages mentioned that you
> cannot do in some way using Ada.  Maybe you are just lost without your
> wizards?
> 
> 4.)  Many of the Ada projects that I have worked on would have been much
> more difficult, or down right impossible, to manage in C or C++ (I have not
> done large scale development (or even testing) of anything written in Java,
> so I cannot comment on that).  Add to that the fact that for certain types
> of projects, you also get a lower cost of development and (especially)
> maintenance, a tendency for less bugs, etc.
> 
> Of course, if you are mostly writing Windows apps, then VC++ is a lot better
> environment than _anything_ you are going to get for Ada (at least at this
> time).  

Why? I'm using ObjectADA for Windows, and I feel quite good with it.

> Then again, we are coming back to "use the right tool for the right
> job", and right now, VC++ or VB (or maybe even Java) is often the right tool
> for that job (though Ada is making some in roads there, but the tools are
> not quite on par with VC++ yet (IMHO)).
> 
> --
> with Std_Disclaimer;  use Std_Disclaimer;
> Signature.Put (Name => Ken Sodemann,
>     E_Mail => kwsodema@avistainc.com
>     Web => http://www.pcii.net/~stuffel
>     Company_Web => http://www.avistainc.com);
> 
> 
> 
> 
>