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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,80e8e0df8032d89e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-09-28 14:33:33 PST Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!waikato!comp.vuw.ac.nz!canterbury.ac.nz!equinox.gen.nz!equinox!jsnode.equinox.gen.nz!joe From: joe@jsnode.equinox.gen.nz (Joseph Skinner) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is C/C++ the future? Distribution: world Message-ID: <780673899joe.joe@jsnode.equinox.gen.nz> Date: Wed, 28 Sep 1994 01:51:41 +1200 References: Organization: .. X-Newsreader: TRN for OS/2 X-Posting-Software: UUPC/extended 1.12i inews (14Mar94 22:26) Date: 1994-09-28T01:51:41+12:00 List-Id: In article srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes: > The October 1994 issue of UPSIDE (a yuppy kind of entrepreneurial magazine >popular in Silicon Valley) has an article on one of the roundtable discussions >of industry leaders, in this case predicting what technology will be like in >the year 2000. > > On the panel were Gordon Bell (father of the VAX), Robert Lucky (VP of >applied research at Bellcore), Nathan Myhrvold (VP of advanced technology at >Microsoft), Jef Raskin (one father of the Macintosh GUI), and John Warnock >(CEO of Adobe). > > One of the questions was: "What will be the dominant programming language?" >with the following responses: > >BELL: Visual Basic, Mosaic markup language, C++, Cobol, Fortran, Telescript >LUCKY: C++. There will be too much investment in code to change this. >MYHRVOLD: C and C++ >RASKIN: BASIC >WARNOCK: C > > Admittedly a very small sample, tho from representatives of companies with >a much bigger influence in determining the future of programming than anyone >in the Ada Mandated world, especially in light of industry trends. > > As an example of what Lucky is referring to, Taligent (an IBM/Apple/HP joint >effort) is releasing this summer a developer release of the TAE (Taligent >Application Environment) - a collection of 100 frameworks, comprising over >2000 C++ classes and over 30,000 member functions, and who knows how many >million lines of C++ code. This dwarfs anything in the non-Mandated part of >From what I've heard the TAE comprises only about 3/4 M lines of code largely due to heavy code reuse. This makes it smaller than C projects such as NT at ~4 M. >the Ada world. Along with Taligent, Microsoft and Sun (whose OpenStep has >already been shipped to 100,000 users - larger than the installed Ada base) >are also coming out similarly large and complex C++ systems that will be >adopted by large sectors of the corporate software world. Who will want to >adopt other languages once companies start investing in these systems? Why >switch away from these industry standards? Just to get a compiler that stops >when it encounters an error? > >(And guess who funded tons of the academic R&D that is being used on these >large C++ environments. ARPA, and it still is so funding, apparently in >cahoots with the Air Force [KBSA] and the SEI. So much for military loyalty. >The Ada9X academic campaign is a complete waste of time and money because >ARPA already has cornered DoD influence of the academic world and ARPA has no >intention of allowing any other branch of the DoD to seriously encroach on >their turf with Ada). > > Convert? Certainly not any customer of TeamAda member IBM. IBM's future >OO plans will be based on its' VisualAge and VisualGen. To supplement these >tools, IBM intends to get back into the compiler business in a big way with >C++, object oriented Cobol and perhaps even object oriented PL/1. Also >coming are Smalltalk, object oriented REXX, Visual RPG and Microsoft's Visual >Basic. IBM intends to deliver fully compatible versions of most compilers >across all its strategic systems, which now includes OS/2, AIX, OS/400 and >MVS. BUT NOT ADA!!!!!!! Imagine IBM prefering an object oriented REXX over >Ada. Having milked all of the Ada pork it can out of the DoD, why should IBM >invest in a dead-end language? Why should anyone, if as the DualUse plan >shows, even the DoD is unwilling to invest in commercializing Ada? OO Rexx is something which is a natural extension to the Rexx language but has very little to do with Ada as the 2 langauages are really not likely to be used for the same things. Consider that Rexx was designed as a replacement for JCL. Also since IBMs direction with OOP seems to be strongly influenced by CORBA IDL as seen in SOM there is really no reason for not using Ada 9x. > > Don't believe me? Well, someone is giving a very rational lecture at the >upcoming weeklong C++ WORLD conference (Austin, TX, 11/14-11/18) on rules of >thumb for managing industrial-strength object-oriented C++ projects. It >will probably be full of rational tips for using some company's products >as a rationale for using C++ on these large OO projects that are dominating >industry. Obviously this rational lecture reflects a rational trend by >rational corporate software developers, many of whom will be using either >Taligent's, Microsoft's, or Sun's environments and need strong C++ tools, >rationally. > > Nothing DISA and the ASA is doing with its DualUse plans will have any >effect (assuming they care to measure) whatsoever on industry use of Ada. >All their plans will do is to further entrench Ada as a niche language for >those very large, critical systems that are too rare to be a basis for a >thriving industry. Other than for that need, both outside and INSIDE the >DoD, Ada won't be used, no matter how many meaningless and conflicting >mandates the DoD issues (like Mosemann's AI memo that strategically ommitted >mentioning Ada, probably the inspiration for the Defense Science Board not >to cover Ada in its study). Joe. -- =============================================================================== Joseph Skinner | Invercargill usenet: joe@jsnode.equinox.gen.nz | New Zealand There is no such thing as a wizard who minds his own business - Berengis the Black Court Mage to the Earl Caeline