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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d275ffeffdf83655 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Richard D Riehle Subject: Re: Ada vs C++ vs Java Date: 1999/02/05 Message-ID: <79fdvc$ses@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 441082126 References: <369C1F31.AE5AF7EF@concentric.net> <369DDDC3.FDE09999@sea.ericsson.se> <369e309a.32671759@news.demon.co.uk> <77ledn$eu7$1@remarQ.com> <77pnqc$cgi$1@newnews.global.net.uk> <8p64spq5lo5.fsf@Eng.Sun.COM> <77t3ld$nou$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79ce4s$lfq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <79chc7$ko6@drn.newsguy.com> Organization: Netcom X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Feb 05 12:40:44 PM CST 1999 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-02-05T12:40:44-06:00 List-Id: In article <79chc7$ko6@drn.newsguy.com>, mike wrote: >Look at this code below posted here recently by another poster. This code >sorts a list of names inputed from stdin, look how clear, short, >elegent, and easy to read it is. [snipped away the fragment of terse, concise, and error-prone C++ code] Unfortunately, one cannot make such large conclusions from such tiny source code fragments. I could easily post some C++ code that would be difficult to understand with corresponding Ada code that would be emminently readable and vice-versa. If you are trying to compare two languages, you must set out the criteria for the comparison, based on your specific needs, examine each language in terms of those criteria, and then decide which one best satisfies the criteria. The broadly framed pronouncements that X is better than Y usually originate in some biases that have little to do with either X or Y. As nearly as I can tell, no one has completed an objective study of this kind that can be agreed upon by advocates of their own preferred language. An excellent treatment by Dr. Patricia Lawlis, in her sincere effort to be intellectually honest, is probably the closest right now. Even that effort is criticized by the C++ camp, the Eiffel camp, etc. "He convinced against his will is of the same opinion still." No amount of evangelism is going to have any benefit. Ada is only going to survive if it be used effectively on real projects with high visibility. That means we, the Ada advocates, must use it for a wide range of projects, write about our successes, show off our results at conferences (not Ada conferences), and demonstrate how easy it is to be successful with it. This means, build products that real people use; products that arrive on the shelf in shrink-wrap; products that the consumer selects because they are superior, not because they are written in language X or language Y. There is the ancient story of the IBM salesman on his wedding night which I will not repeat here. Those of you who have been in the industry for a while will recall it. We have a tool, Ada, that can be used to build superior products. Let's start using it instead of prancing about telling everyone how good it's going to be. Richard Riehle richard@adaworks.com http://www.adaworks.com