Re: where can we get a job with ada

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[David Kristola]

On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 22:22:01 -0800, HollymaN wrote
(in message <deum4.6241$vl6.70817@news20.bellglobal.com>):
> 
> TIA 
> 
> 

Lockheed Martin Missiles and Space, Sunnyvale CA.
http://lmms.external.lmco.com/

I personally know of one project that could use a few really good
Ada software engineers right now (security clearance required).



-- 
--djk, keeper of arcane lore & trivial fluff
Home: David95037 at aol dot com
Rot13: Qnivq95037@nby.pbz
Spam: goto.hades@welovespam.com

where can we get a job with ada

[HollymaN]

TIA

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[EKoerber]

Yeah, but then we'd have to move to the land of fruits and nuts!

Hi Dave!!!  :)

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Ted Dennison]

In article <20000204073443.24976.00001288@ng-ci1.aol.com>,
  ekoerber@aol.com (EKoerber) wrote:
> Yeah, but then we'd have to move to the land of fruits and nuts!

I'm a little more put off by the $300,000 2 bedroom houses and 2 hour
commutes.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Stanley R. Allen]

HollymaN wrote:
> 

Try this:



-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen@raytheon.com

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Stanley R. Allen]

"Stanley R. Allen" wrote:
> 
> Try this:
> 

But he accidentally hit the "Send" button before pasting this:

http://www.adaic.org/jobs/browse.html

:o

-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen@raytheon.com

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Brian Rogoff]

On Fri, 4 Feb 2000, Ted Dennison wrote:
> In article <20000204073443.24976.00001288@ng-ci1.aol.com>,
>   ekoerber@aol.com (EKoerber) wrote:
> > Yeah, but then we'd have to move to the land of fruits and nuts!
> 
> I'm a little more put off by the $300,000 2 bedroom houses and 2 hour
> commutes.

$300,000? You're really out of touch. You can't buy a decent house for 
$300K, even in Sunnyvale. Try doubling your estimate.

The commute isn't that bad though.

Swinging back to Ada, I've never seen an Ada job advertised which paid a 
competitive salary by Silicon Valley standards. I hope the unadvertised
ones pay well.

-- Brian, looking for a house :-(

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[David Kristola]

On Fri, 4 Feb 2000 9:27:03 -0800, Brian Rogoff wrote
(in message <Pine.BSF.4.21.0002040920070.2217-100000@shell5.ba.best.com>):
> 
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2000, Ted Dennison wrote: 
>> In article <20000204073443.24976.00001288@ng-ci1.aol.com>, 
>> ekoerber@aol.com (EKoerber) wrote: 
>>> Yeah, but then we'd have to move to the land of fruits and nuts! 
(Hi Ed, so am i a fruit or a nut?)
>> 
>> I'm a little more put off by the $300,000 2 bedroom houses and 2 hour 
>> commutes. 
> 
> $300,000? You're really out of touch. You can't buy a decent house for 
> $300K, even in Sunnyvale. Try doubling your estimate. 

I hear jokes about the $500K fixer-upper places.  :-(

> The commute isn't that bad though. 

If you can afford to live in Sunnyvale (or someplace along the new
light rail line).  The Lockheed Martin stop is open for business.
I know people who commute 2 hours so they can afford a house.

> Swinging back to Ada, I've never seen an Ada job advertised which paid a 
> competitive salary by Silicon Valley standards. I hope the unadvertised ones 
> pay well. 

I think that is one of the reasons Ada jobs are still available.  On my
project, 3 out of 4 of the Ada coders are contractors.  Make that 3 out
of 5, we have a brand new person just learning Ada.

Some projects are going to C++ because they can find people with that on
their resume.  I don't think they pay any more, but they can find more
people willing to take the job. The funny thing is, there seems to be a
lot of turn over.  With C++ and a year of experience, Netscape, Yahoo,
Sisco Systems, etc. are willing to pay a lot more.

I'm just amazed at how many good people are still around (contractor
and direct).  Money isn't everything, and i can't get excited about
working on a new database after playing with stealth attack airplanes,
battlefield command and control systems, nuclear attack submarines,
missiles, and satellites.  Even if they don't pay as well, Ada jobs
are far more exciting!

> -- Brian, looking for a house :-( 

--djk, resigned to living in an apartment :-(

-- 
--djk, keeper of arcane lore & trivial fluff
Home: David95037 at aol dot com
Rot13: Qnivq95037@nby.pbz
Spam: goto.hades@welovespam.com

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Simon Brady]

In article <01HW.B4C1346100072D2408A24140@news.pacbell.net>, David95037@see-my.sig wrote:
>Money isn't everything, and i can't get excited about
>working on a new database after playing with stealth attack airplanes,
>battlefield command and control systems, nuclear attack submarines,
>missiles, and satellites.  Even if they don't pay as well, Ada jobs
>are far more exciting!

*envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship... Personally I'd love to 
work with Ada when I graduate, but realistically my only hope is to find a 
non-military site. Does anyone care to comment on the state of the civillian 
Ada job market? I know that Ada is (rightfully, IMAO) touted as the language 
of choice for ATC, avionics, industrial control etc., but are many employers 
in such commercial domains actually using it? Or should I just accept my 
inevitable assimilation into the C++ collective?

Thanks...
Simon

Simon Brady                        simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[David Tannen]

Hi,

I know someplace that is looking for quite a few Ada developers.
Currently we have 60% contractors vs 40% directs.  If you want
a job doing real-time Ada and you are interested in a direct job
let me know.

An ambassador for Christ
David Tannen (tannen@jcdisciples.org)
John 14:21 "Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who
            loves me.  He who loves me will be loved by my Father,
            and I too will love him and show myself to him."
Check Out:   http://www.jcdisciples.org/davidtannen/index.html

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Gareth]

>
>*envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship... Personally I'd love to 
>work with Ada when I graduate, but realistically my only hope is to find a 
>non-military site. Does anyone care to comment on the state of the civillian 
>Ada job market? I know that Ada is (rightfully, IMAO) touted as the language 
>of choice for ATC, avionics, industrial control etc., but are many employers 
>in such commercial domains actually using it? Or should I just accept my 
>inevitable assimilation into the C++ collective?
>
>Thanks...
>Simon
>
>Simon Brady                        simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz


Ahh.... I see you're from New Zealand.

Don't you have a defense department that programs in Ada? I know that
the Australian defense industries do - and there's a local air force
base about twenty minutes away from my house, and the programmers
there use Ada extensively.

However, Australia doesn't work with the *exciting* stuff, like
stealth aircraft, space shuttles and so on (just submarines that don't
work).... and that's the kind of thing I'd like to do.

I fully intend to move to the US and obtain citizenship there when I
finish early next year.

- Gareth

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Kent Paul Dolan]

Gareth <groth@chariot.net.au> wrote:

>>*envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship... Personally I'd love to 
>>work with Ada when I graduate, but realistically my only hope is to find a 
>>non-military site. Does anyone care to comment on the state of the civillian 
>>Ada job market? I know that Ada is (rightfully, IMAO) touted as the language 
>>of choice for ATC, avionics, industrial control etc., but are many employers 
>>in such commercial domains actually using it? Or should I just accept my 
>>inevitable assimilation into the C++ collective?

Ada is used by military establishments all over the world, not just in the US.
On both the military and civilain sides, Michael Feldman's labor of love, "Who's
Using Ada":

http://www.seas.gwu.edu/~mfeldman/ada-project-summary.html

should bring hope to the heart of any Ada programmer wannabe.  Keeping
automated trains from colliding is every bit as "mission critical" as
keeping fighter aircraft clear on who is friend and who is foe during
the confusion of combat.

>>Thanks...
>>Simon

>>Simon Brady                        simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz
>

>Ahh.... I see you're from New Zealand.

>Don't you have a defense department that programs in Ada? I know that
>the Australian defense industries do - and there's a local air force
>base about twenty minutes away from my house, and the programmers
>there use Ada extensively.

>However, Australia doesn't work with the *exciting* stuff, like
>stealth aircraft, space shuttles and so on (just submarines that don't
>work).... and that's the kind of thing I'd like to do.

That over the horizon radar I read about a few years ago sounded right
up there, and by now the stuff you mentioned is probably a lot running
on legacy code.  Why don't you look a little harder before leaping.  I
live in the US, and have nothing against it, much for it, and your
chances of ending up unbearably rich are rumored to be high in my
immediate neighborhood (the sort of thing that happens to _other_
people), but our resident Aussie just returned home by choice.  You
might not find what you expected when you get here, and it is always
hard to live with the shock of things like our chaotic and expensive
medical system when you expect such things to be accomplished much more
sensibly from prior experience at home.  He missed family, Australian
Rules Football, people who could intelligently discuss ARF, a modestly
less confiscatory tax system, cricket, people who didn't consider
cricket some bizarre UK eccentricity, reasonable land prices, robust,
intelligent, level headed women who didn't think he spoke with an
accent, and lots else I'm sure that he didn't bother to share.

>I fully intend to move to the US and obtain citizenship there when I
>finish early next year.

Ok, but you were warned.

>- Gareth

               ===== random archival quality quote =====

And now [my Magic 8-Ball of Destiny] doesn't work.

I  have  no  idea  what  this  means.   It  could  have  very  ominous
implications.  Perhaps my comrade Rick is right when he says, "I would
choose to look at it this way: it is telling you that your life is now
completely determined by your own free will."  I mean, what a curse to
live down.
        -- j h woodyatt <jhw@wetware.com> <http://www.wetware.com/jhw>

--
Kent Paul Dolan.
<xanthian@well.com> <xanthian@aztec.asu.edu> <xanthian@whistle.com>

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Simon Brady]

In article <389e1463.2654619@news.chariot.net.au>, groth@chariot.net.au (Gareth) wrote:
>Ahh.... I see you're from New Zealand.
>
>Don't you have a defense department that programs in Ada?

Our Navy has been recruiting Ada software engineers to work on the ANZAC 
frigates' combat systems. My understanding is that the software is developed 
in Aussie, then modifed for local conditions. The work itself sounds rather 
cool, but there's the small matter of military service (you know, discipline 
and drill and physical fitness - not exactly geek-friendly!).

>However, Australia doesn't work with the *exciting* stuff, like
>stealth aircraft, space shuttles and so on (just submarines that don't
>work).... and that's the kind of thing I'd like to do.

Yes, I can relate to that feeling. But it does pay to keep things in 
perspective - one of the things I like about the Ada community is that it's 
focussed on applications where the stuff you write really matters. Even the 
most "unexciting" Ada app tends to make talk of "mission-critical" accounting 
software seem rather laughable...

Simon Brady                        simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Gareth]

>
>http://www.seas.gwu.edu/~mfeldman/ada-project-summary.html
>
>should bring hope to the heart of any Ada programmer wannabe.  Keeping
>automated trains from colliding is every bit as "mission critical" as
>keeping fighter aircraft clear on who is friend and who is foe during
>the confusion of combat.

Thanks for the link - it was interesting reading.

On a side note, my major Ada programming project last year was a
real-time automated train controller, which ran four real toy trains
(and a freight) around a track. I didn't know the meaning of "mission
critical" until I began that project - the lectureres would literally
yell and scream when the trains collided and fell of the track.

- Gareth

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Ted Dennison]

In article <949867976.281549@the-rowan.albatross.co.nz>,
  simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Simon Brady) wrote:
> *envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship... Personally I'd
> love to work with Ada when I graduate, but realistically my only hope
> is to find a

Perhaps. But I have worked on several jobs at LMC that had foreign
nationals. The job I'm on now (not LMC) at one point had 2 foreign
nationals (out of about 11 developers).

But lot of companies in the US like to keep foreigners under a kind of
indentured servitude while they (glatially) get your Green Card
paperwork in order. One of my coworkers was working here 10 years before
he finally got his. During that time, if you don't do what they want you
to, they theoreticaly can lay you off and inform the INS that you don't
have a job (and thus must be deported). Its not a situation I'd
reccomend. LMC is probably one of the few development companies that
can't risk possible lawsuits by operating that way.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Ted Dennison]

In article <389e1463.2654619@news.chariot.net.au>,
  groth@chariot.net.au (Gareth) wrote:

> However, Australia doesn't work with the *exciting* stuff, like
> stealth aircraft, space shuttles and so on (just submarines that don't
> work).... and that's the kind of thing I'd like to do.

I've found that when you are writing software, all applications look
pretty much the same. Only the requirements change. But perhaps I'm a
bit of an odd duck. I get far more excited about a good compiler than
about a working MH60-J simulator. I guess that's why I make them, rather
than buy them. :-)

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Kent Paul Dolan]

Gareth <groth@chariot.net.au> wrote:

>>http://www.seas.gwu.edu/~mfeldman/ada-project-summary.html

>>should bring hope to the heart of any Ada programmer wannabe.  Keeping
>>automated trains from colliding is every bit as "mission critical" as
>>keeping fighter aircraft clear on who is friend and who is foe during
>>the confusion of combat.

>Thanks for the link - it was interesting reading.

>On a side note, my major Ada programming project last year was a
>real-time automated train controller, which ran four real toy trains
>(and a freight) around a track. I didn't know the meaning of "mission
>critical" until I began that project - the lectureres would literally
>yell and scream when the trains collided and fell of the track.

That got a laugh around the office.  Looks like you've got your pick of
countries in which to play with bigger toy trains and code Ada.
Michael's list shows a lot of projects, and since many of them are from
the same parent company, you'd probably get the chance to travel a lot
while you're young, which is one of the two best times to do it.

I hope someone made a video of your project to use as part of your
resume, you'd be one of the few train-programmers-with-portfolio.

Find a science fiction novel called SteamBird, I can almost guarantee
you'd love some of the train scenes in it.  Author might be David
Drake, but I'm not sure, names just evaporate from my mind between the
inhalation and the attempt to say them, have all my life.

               ===== random archival quality quote =====

in the distance a roasted cave newt screamed in agony
                                 -- Andrew Palfreyman

--
Kent Paul Dolan.
<xanthian@well.com> <xanthian@aztec.asu.edu> <xanthian@whistle.com>

Re: where can we ... [off topic]

[Nick Roberts]

But cricket _is_ a bizarre UK eccentricity :-)

--
Nick Roberts

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Jeff Carter]

Gareth wrote:
> I fully intend to move to the US and obtain citizenship there when I
> finish early next year.

I can't speak for Australia, but when I worked in Europe (1979-1983)
work hours were 09:00-17:00, with 13:00-14:00 off for lunch. I got 4
weeks paid vacation per year, a truckload of paid holidays, and
unlimited paid sick time. In the US, you'll typically work 08:30-17:00
or longer with a half hour for lunch, 2 weeks vacation, fewer holidays,
and limited sick time (5 days is common). I get paid more in the US,
though. So, if money is everything to you, come to the US. If not,
compare your options carefully.

-- 
Jeff Carter
"You empty-headed animal-food-trough wiper."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Florian Weimer]

simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Simon Brady) writes:

> In article <01HW.B4C1346100072D2408A24140@news.pacbell.net>, David95037@see-my.sig wrote:
> >Money isn't everything, and i can't get excited about
> >working on a new database after playing with stealth attack airplanes,
> >battlefield command and control systems, nuclear attack submarines,
> >missiles, and satellites.  Even if they don't pay as well, Ada jobs
> >are far more exciting!
> 
> *envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship...

And a special attitude towards weapons of mass destructions and stuff
like that.  Sometimes I wonder whether a pacifist is allowed to code
in Ada at all. ;)

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Ted Dennison]

In article <8766v93w66.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>,
  Florian Weimer <fw-usenet@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> wrote:
> And a special attitude towards weapons of mass destructions and stuff
> like that.  Sometimes I wonder whether a pacifist is allowed to code
> in Ada at all. ;)

I haven't done too bad. In the past 11 years I've done NASA work, and
COMSEC (Communications Security) and Naval engine controllers, and
simulators. As long as the software that controls the motion-base and
joystick are working properly, its damn tough to kill someone with a
simulator. :-)

In my career I've only had to turn down one job (working on bombs) due
in part to moral qualms. Its tough to rationalize that one away.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Wes Groleau]

> > In article <01HW.B4C1346100072D2408A24140@news.pacbell.net>, David95037@see-my.sig wrote:
> > >Money isn't everything, and i can't get excited about
> > >working on a new database after playing with stealth attack airplanes,
> > >battlefield command and control systems, nuclear attack submarines,
> > >missiles, and satellites.  Even if they don't pay as well, Ada jobs
> > >are far more exciting!
> >
> > *envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship...
> 
> And a special attitude towards weapons of mass destructions and stuff
> like that.  Sometimes I wonder whether a pacifist is allowed to code
> in Ada at all. ;)

Ada exists in plenty of non-defense realms.  Generally, pacifists 
and non-U.S. citizens are not barred from
- medical systems
- ESA contracting (European Space Agency)
- air traffic control
- commercial avionics
- compilers, debuggers, and development environments
- commercial communications
- commercial transportation
- process control
- ? other ?
- (if you are self-employed, anything at all you want to do)

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Robert B. Love]

In <8766v93w66.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> Florian Weimer wrote:
> > *envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship...
> 
> And a special attitude towards weapons of mass destructions and stuff
> like that.  Sometimes I wonder whether a pacifist is allowed to code
> in Ada at all. ;)
> 

You know about the secret weapons capabilities of the Space Station?
Darn.  

Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA doesn't have any 
offensive capability unless you count falling out of the sky on top
of your opponent.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Bob Love                                   
 rlove@neosoft.com                            
----------------------------------------------------------------

Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Vladimir Olensky]

Robert B. Love wrote in message ...

>Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA ...

Are there any references to that ?
It would be very interesting to read more about using Ada
on  ISS.

Regards,
Vladimir Olensky

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[David Kristola]

On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 12:32:33 -0800, Florian Weimer wrote
(in message <8766v93w66.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>):
> 
> simon.brady@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Simon Brady) writes: 
> 
>> In article <01HW.B4C1346100072D2408A24140@news.pacbell.net>, 
>> David95037@see-my.sig wrote: 
>>> Money isn't everything, and i can't get excited about working on a new 
>>> database after playing with stealth attack airplanes, battlefield command 
>>> and control systems, nuclear attack submarines, missiles, and satellites. 
>>>  Even if they don't pay as well, Ada jobs are far more exciting! 
>> 
>> *envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship... 
> 
> And a special attitude towards weapons of mass destructions and stuff like 
> that.  Sometimes I wonder whether a pacifist is allowed to code in Ada at 
> all. ;) 

I won't stop you.  :-)

If you could find a way to eliminate the need for the defense industry,
i'm sure i could still find interesting work.  There are many safety
critical systems being built, and other challenging things.  Ada is
ideal for medical devices to air traffic control to commercial air and
space applications.

--djk
Sig shortened to remove reference to true email address, sorry.

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Ted Dennison]

In article
<F721B334E5BE49E3.6D9E1F7A7C81C3CE.9B64FD843F046A46@lp.airnews.net>,
  rlove@antispam.neosoft.com (Robert B. Love ) wrote:
> Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA doesn't have any
> offensive capability unless you count falling out of the sky on top
> of your opponent.

Well, I did mention NASA also. But I feel compelled to mention here that
when I was working on their groundstation (STGT) I was told that there
were some sattelites that it controlled whose function was classified. I
wouldn't be too shocked if some of them couldn't do something a bit
natier than just fall on you.

But perhaps I've just been watching Real Genius too much. Anyone for
some popcorn? :-)

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Robert B. Love]

In <sc336dpgee6168@corp.supernews.com> "Vladimir Olensky" wrote:
> 
> Robert B. Love wrote in message ...
> 
> >Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA ...
> 
> Are there any references to that ?
> It would be very interesting to read more about using Ada
> on  ISS.

Briefly the Station has a 3 tiered heirarchy of flight computers
talking on 1553 busses.  The flight computers, called MDMs, usually
come in pairs with one as primary and the other as backup.  These
computers are 386 class machines.  Each of these Flight computers
has a program that is written in Ada 83 running in it.  It will
function both as the real time executive and as the application.
One interesting difference is the GNC MDM.  Its Ada code is not
written by hand but spewed out from MatrixX, a commercial program
often used by control engineers.

To interact with these Flight computers, the crew carry 386/486 laptops
running Solaris with X-windows and C code to send commands over the
1553 bus to the MDMs.

Additionally, the big simulators, used for both crew and mission
controller training, are programmed in Ada 83 on SGI machines.
These also have some small portion of C code.

I know less about the Russian flight computers.  I believe they use
a mix of C and Ada.

Boeing is the prime contractor and is writing this Ada code in Houston,
Huntsville, Huntington Beach and perhaps other sites.  Raytheon is
building the simulators.

I wish I had statistics on the total number of SLOCs being produced or
the total number of people employed in writing it.  Anybody have
better info?

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Bob Love                                   
 rlove@neosoft.com                            
----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Vladimir Olensky]

Thanks for very interesting info.

Hope someone else will add more to this.
ISS is international station so as much info as possible should be
publicly available.
What you described  is also very good argument in favor of Ada.

I left Russian Space Industry  about  8 years ago so I do not really know
if Ada is used there now  but at my time there most  of software for onboard
machines and controllers was written in assembler.  Some software was
written
mostly in Modula-2. Probably some in C but I am not sure.


Regards,
Vladimir


Robert B. Love wrote in message
<1B7F2748B2DC0C99.80CD6B3737427E86.89C76B10C3F88FB3@lp.airnews.net>...
>In <sc336dpgee6168@corp.supernews.com> "Vladimir Olensky" wrote:
>>
>> Robert B. Love wrote in message ...
>>
>> >Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA ...
>>
>> Are there any references to that ?
>> It would be very interesting to read more about using Ada
>> on  ISS.
>
>Briefly the Station has a 3 tiered heirarchy of flight computers
>talking on 1553 busses.  The flight computers, called MDMs, usually
>come in pairs with one as primary and the other as backup.  These
>computers are 386 class machines.  Each of these Flight computers
>has a program that is written in Ada 83 running in it.  It will
>function both as the real time executive and as the application.
>One interesting difference is the GNC MDM.  Its Ada code is not
>written by hand but spewed out from MatrixX, a commercial program
>often used by control engineers.
>
>To interact with these Flight computers, the crew carry 386/486 laptops
>running Solaris with X-windows and C code to send commands over the
>1553 bus to the MDMs.
>
>Additionally, the big simulators, used for both crew and mission
>controller training, are programmed in Ada 83 on SGI machines.
>These also have some small portion of C code.
>
>I know less about the Russian flight computers.  I believe they use
>a mix of C and Ada.
>
>Boeing is the prime contractor and is writing this Ada code in Houston,
>Huntsville, Huntington Beach and perhaps other sites.  Raytheon is
>building the simulators.
>
>I wish I had statistics on the total number of SLOCs being produced or
>the total number of people employed in writing it.  Anybody have
>better info?
>
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------
> Bob Love
> rlove@neosoft.com
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Jean St-Pierre]

I can also confirm that the software for the new space station robotic
arm is also completely written in Ada 83, for a 386 class processor.
The simulator for that arm is a jolly mix of Fortran, C, C++ and Ada,
running on SGI computers.

Robert B. Love <rlove@antispam.neosoft.com> wrote in message
news:1B7F2748B2DC0C99.80CD6B3737427E86.89C76B10C3F88FB3@lp.airnews.net...
> In <sc336dpgee6168@corp.supernews.com> "Vladimir Olensky" wrote:
> >
> > Robert B. Love wrote in message ...
> >
> > >Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA ...
> >
> > Are there any references to that ?
> > It would be very interesting to read more about using Ada
> > on  ISS.
>
> Briefly the Station has a 3 tiered heirarchy of flight computers
> talking on 1553 busses.  The flight computers, called MDMs, usually
> come in pairs with one as primary and the other as backup.  These
> computers are 386 class machines.  Each of these Flight computers
> has a program that is written in Ada 83 running in it.  It will
> function both as the real time executive and as the application.
> One interesting difference is the GNC MDM.  Its Ada code is not
> written by hand but spewed out from MatrixX, a commercial program
> often used by control engineers.
>
> To interact with these Flight computers, the crew carry 386/486 laptops
> running Solaris with X-windows and C code to send commands over the
> 1553 bus to the MDMs.
>
> Additionally, the big simulators, used for both crew and mission
> controller training, are programmed in Ada 83 on SGI machines.
> These also have some small portion of C code.
>
> I know less about the Russian flight computers.  I believe they use
> a mix of C and Ada.
>
> Boeing is the prime contractor and is writing this Ada code in Houston,
> Huntsville, Huntington Beach and perhaps other sites.  Raytheon is
> building the simulators.
>
> I wish I had statistics on the total number of SLOCs being produced or
> the total number of people employed in writing it.  Anybody have
> better info?
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>  Bob Love
>  rlove@neosoft.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>

Re: where can we get a job with ada

[Florian Weimer]

rlove@antispam.neosoft.com (Robert B. Love ) writes:

> In <8766v93w66.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> Florian Weimer wrote:
> > > *envious sigh* And they all require US citizenship...
> > 
> > And a special attitude towards weapons of mass destructions and stuff
> > like that.  Sometimes I wonder whether a pacifist is allowed to code
> > in Ada at all. ;)
> 
> You know about the secret weapons capabilities of the Space Station?
> Darn.  

But you won't deny that there has always been a strong military interest
in space technology, will you? ;)

But I was just kidding, of course.  In fact, I plan to take Ada with
me whereever I go.  (There aren't many programming languages in this
category.  Usually, after writing several thousand lines of code in
some language, I think "interesting concepts -- but there so many
awkward things".)

Currently, I can't imagine that I'll ever work in the software industry.
Therefore, I think it's reasonable to expect that language decisions
are my own...

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Andrew Thomas Wilson]

Vladimir Olensky wrote:
> 
> Robert B. Love wrote in message ...
> 
> >Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA ...
> 
> Are there any references to that ?
> It would be very interesting to read more about using Ada
> on  ISS.

I just had lunch with a guy that
was working on some embedded
system (he didn't specify) at
Marshall Space Flight Center.
He said that most programming
at NASA in Ada is for embedded
systems, which is where Ada
really excels. Of course he
also says that unless it's
an embedded system, the tendency
is not to use Ada. At any rate,
I'm learning Ada now because
it's free (Gnat). Can't beat that!

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[David Hoffman]

In article <38E8C81A.AA62CF4C@HiWAAY.net>, Andrew Thomas Wilson
<atwilson@HiWAAY.net> wrote:

> Vladimir Olensky wrote:
> > 
> > Robert B. Love wrote in message ...
> > 
> > >Actually, lots of work on the ISS is in Ada and NASA ...
> > 
> > Are there any references to that ?
> > It would be very interesting to read more about using Ada
> > on  ISS.

Hi,

My understanding is that the core GN&C functions in the flight software (at
least the US side) are written in Ada. I have a friend who is a
subcontractor
to Raytheon where he writes Ada code for the part task trainer (a subsystem
simulator).

David Hoffman
hoffman@insync.net

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Robert B. Love]

In <hoffman-ya02408000R1204002048410001@news.insync.net> David Hoffman 
wrote:
> 
> My understanding is that the core GN&C functions in the flight software 
(at
> least the US side) are written in Ada. I have a friend who is a

Well, true and false.  The GNC software is written by Boeing in 
Huntington
Beach using a tool called MatrixX.  This is a popular tool among the
control theory crowd.  It is based on a dataflow paradigm.  You connect
blocks showing signal flow and can put some predefined algorithms in 
the blocks. (you can design your own blocks too).  You test the code
using a built in test tools and scheduler.  When you're happy with
the results you push a button and out pops "autocode", machine
generated Ada that is not meant to be read by humans.    Other, non GNC
flight computers, have the flight code written by hand the way its
supposed to be.

> subcontractor
> to Raytheon where he writes Ada code for the part task trainer (a 
subsystem
> simulator).
> 

<PRIDE>
Raytheon also builds the full up trainer used to train the flight crew,
the mission controllers, some payloads operators at remote sites etc.
Increasingly, the simulator is being used as a validation test bed for
some of the MDMs and software issues although that wasn't its purpose.
</PRIDE>

Both the Part Task Trainer and the Full Task Trainer are written in Ada.
But I keep hearing that people want future version written in C++.  Why
people would want to mess with working code is beyond me.  What I 
want to know is how do we keep Ada in the forefront?  Why is there
an air of desirablity to C++?


--
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Bob Love                                   
 rlove@neosoft.com                            
----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Desirability of C++ (was Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada))

[Wes Groleau]

> (manager) If we switch to C++, we will be able to hire programmers.

If you switch to C++, you'll NEED to hire more 
programmers!  And buy more debuggers, and.....

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

Re: Desirability of C++

[Stanley R. Allen]

Wes Groleau wrote:
> 
> > (manager) If we switch to C++, we will be able to hire programmers.
> 
> If you switch to C++, you'll NEED to hire more
> programmers!  And buy more debuggers, and.....
> 

We should seriously question the assumption that it is easier to
hire C++ vs. Ada programmers.  The entire Information Technology 
industry is facing severe hiring problems, so the shortage of
Ada programmers is at least in part a reflection of the more
general situation.

-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com

Desirability of C++ (was Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada))

[David Kristola]

On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 16:36:55 -0700, Robert B. Love  wrote (in message 
<7EA1B852F5D4D8C6.26EEE9181C80F0DF.0161EA2D9C353253@lp.airnews.net>):
> Both the Part Task Trainer and the Full Task Trainer are written in Ada. But 
> I keep hearing that people want future version written in C++.  Why people 
> would want to mess with working code is beyond me.  What I want to know is 
> how do we keep Ada in the forefront?  Why is there an air of desirablity to 
> C++? 

I'm sure this is an over-simplification, but the some of the excuses i hear 
around the Missiles & Space campus go something like this:

(software engineer) I want to learn C++ on the job so that i can get a real 
job.

(manager) If we switch to C++, we will be able to hire programmers.

Note that there are lots of C++ jobs in the Bay Area, and those jobs pay well, 
or so goes the rumor.

There are lots of C++ software people in the area, but would they work were i 
work even if the work was in C++?  Can i work "work" into this paragraph a few 
more times?  I think the answer to both of these questions is best assumed to 
be "no".

I think part of the problem is "better" got lost in the rush for "cheaper" when 
we started "faster, better, cheaper".  In the long run, it won't be cheaper, 
especially if we try to make missiles or spacecraft the way commercial 
companies make software.

Now for the tough question; how do we keep Ada in the forefront?  One way to 
start is to put the "better" back in.  Ada is a big help in this area.

--djk

Re: Desirability of C++

[Marin D. Condic]

Stanley R. Allen wrote:
> We should seriously question the assumption that it is easier to
> hire C++ vs. Ada programmers.  The entire Information Technology
> industry is facing severe hiring problems, so the shortage of
> Ada programmers is at least in part a reflection of the more
> general situation.
> 
I don't know about hiring C++ programmers from experience. I know there
is a general shortage of good technical people, so C++ programmers must
be hard to get too. I *do* know that finding qualified Ada programmers
can be very difficult. I'm still looking for some in different locations
and I'm not being battered by resumes.

I also know from experience that when talking to meatware companies
(from either the perspective of a job seeker or the potential employer)
you get the reaction: "Ada? What's that?" (I might have just as well
said "Jovial" or "Spitbol" or "Befunge".)

It may not be that Ada jobs are harder to fill than C++ jobs, but there
is at least a bigger pool of people who at least know what C++ is. (If
you post qualifications "C++, MFC, Windows", at least people recognize
what that is!) Perceptually speaking, that means managers will *think*
they have a better chance of getting C++ personnel. Just bid the
salaries up & steal them from somewhere else.

I wish it were otherwise, but it would help Ada to hit a "critical mass"
of developers that would make it a player on an equal footing with C++
and Java.

MDC
-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Marin D. Condic
>These things may be possible for companies that are on the scale of
>General Motors or Lockheed Martin, but may well be out of reach for most
>moderate sized companies.

I'm not entirely sure. If I were sure that Ada gave me a competitive advantage
it would be worth spending some money to make sure potential employees knew
about me. E.g. a stand at a job faire or ask to speak to computer science
students about something. I would also consider a reward for employees which
wrote technical articles which mentioned the company, its expertise and kept
Ada visible.

Such an article should be excellent for promoting the company. 1. Our people
got an article on print in <magazine name> which is well regarded in our
profession. 2. Ada is our technical edge which enables us to deliver product
sooner and with more certainty than we would otherwise manage.

>And remember, a copmany's reason for existence
>is *not* to promote some specific technology, but to *make money*.

If using Ada makes enables me to get contracts which I would not otherwise get,
then it is a competitive advantage that I would be willing to spend some money
to maintain.

>This is an interesting assumption. I hate to pick on someone's optimism,
>but in the world of business, you can't let such interesting assumptions
>go unchallenged. Exactly how much do you propose to spend? And exactly
>how much do you anticipate getting back on this investment over how many
>years?

I would expect to spend somewhere between 5 and 10 000 dollars a year. If I
could get projects that enabled me to make money I would spend more.

>What discount rate are you going to apply? What if the world
>changes dramatically before I see these returns?

No risk, no profit.

>The question is never that simple. Someone has to actually put down some
>numbers and commit to a course of action based on those numbers. The
>"philosophical" approach is only useful for generating potential ideas
>or looking for fundamental flaws. Sooner or later you have to get down
>to math and we Ada advocates *must* make a solid business case for it if
>we expect to sell it.

Usually on project decisions are taken based on money spent, and one forget to
take into account manhours. People will spend hours and days telling you how
little money they have while the manhours pour out.

The business case is that a working relationship with a
collage/university/lecturer allows you to get things done that may not be
essential, but will do you good. You get to know potential employees and have
excellent possibility to recruit. Students have a lot more time to spend on a
project than you can. And they can explore more possibilities.

E.g. if you want an export/import facility for database/spreadsheet files to
your applications, but don't consider it essential and you really want
something in Ada which you can modify. Perhaps you want to do it by loading
export filters dynamically. Then that may be an excellent project for a bunch
of students. You have to spend some time on it, it is a gamble, but there might
be a nice payoff in the end. Later you can have more projects when you need a
specific filter.

What do the students get out of this? If you do your bit they get to know how
to run a project and how real world projects work. They get real world feedback
on their work. And if they do a decent job it will look good on their CV.
Perhaps they will get a job as well.

Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Marin D. Condic wrote :
>I don't know about hiring C++ programmers from experience. I know there
>is a general shortage of good technical people, so C++ programmers must
>be hard to get too. I *do* know that finding qualified Ada programmers
>can be very difficult. I'm still looking for some in different locations
>and I'm not being battered by resumes.


If I were hiring Ada programmers I would try to structure my efforts and plan
ahead.

I would try to make sure that students which are trained in Ada would know
about my company. The strategy would be to hire some out of university and make
sure that all the rest knew that I might want to hire them later when they had
aquired more experience. The idea is to get them to look up your company web
site and look for an Ada job when they are fed up with C/C++ etc. "When you
want or need to get a life, look us up!"

If I owned the company I would offer students prizes if they contributed useful
software to the Ada community. The idea would be to organize small/medium
projects which universities could use and then offer prizes for the best entry.
Prizes could be a small grant/computer hardware or some other desirables.
Perhaps also a contribution to the university, department or library. This
would depend on their situation. In some parts of the world, just getting used
PCs would do wonders. Some would be very happy if they got books for their
libraries.

For private persons I might do deals like: You want to go to tri-ada? If you
get me a quality Ada library which allow us to import/export data to
spreadsheets and dbase/access I'll pay travel and hotel for you. And if you are
poor, some spending money as well.

Sure I would be spending some money, but compared to the potential productivity
gains it would give if I could get the people I want it would be a pittance.
And perhaps also tax deductible.

If I knew of other companies which also would be looking for Ada programmers I
would contact them and see if there was any possibility of a joint recruitment
drive. The more companies, the more likely one would be able to "innoculate"
the students against C++. "This is what you want to be doing in a few years".


Lastly, a message from the campaign for mor technical Ada articles: You want
Ada programmers? Write those articles in Dr. Dobbs and get Ada noticed. If
there is an occational Ada related article in Dr. Dobbs then a lot of the FUD
we are used to would go away.

The point is that we want to be able to say: Ada a dying language???? Just last
year there were <number here> articles in Dr Dobbs about Ada projects.

Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Marin D. Condic]

Tarjei T. Jensen wrote:
> If I were hiring Ada programmers I would try to structure my efforts and plan
> ahead.
> 
Ahhhh, if only such luxury were available to us. :-) As with many things
in life, this is a very difficult thing to anticipate. Especially for a
small company.

> I would try to make sure that students which are trained in Ada would know
<good ideas snipped>

These things may be possible for companies that are on the scale of
General Motors or Lockheed Martin, but may well be out of reach for most
moderate sized companies. And remember, a copmany's reason for existence
is *not* to promote some specific technology, but to *make money*. Under
that objective you have to make the case that money spent on technology
X is going to reap more than money spent on technology Y. Even if Ada
has lower life cycle costs, that doesn't automatically mean it makes
more money for the company than using some other language might. Adding
expense to boost recruitment of Ada programmers makes Ada yet again more
expensive. Windows Visual C++ with MFC for a few hundred $ and an add in
the paper offering 5% more than the rest of the world for a C++
programmer starts looking more and more attractive.

> Sure I would be spending some money, but compared to the potential productivity
> gains it would give if I could get the people I want it would be a pittance.
> And perhaps also tax deductible.
> 
This is an interesting assumption. I hate to pick on someone's optimism,
but in the world of business, you can't let such interesting assumptions
go unchallenged. Exactly how much do you propose to spend? And exactly
how much do you anticipate getting back on this investment over how many
years? What discount rate are you going to apply? What if the world
changes dramatically before I see these returns?

The question is never that simple. Someone has to actually put down some
numbers and commit to a course of action based on those numbers. The
"philosophical" approach is only useful for generating potential ideas
or looking for fundamental flaws. Sooner or later you have to get down
to math and we Ada advocates *must* make a solid business case for it if
we expect to sell it.

> Lastly, a message from the campaign for mor technical Ada articles: You want
> Ada programmers? Write those articles in Dr. Dobbs and get Ada noticed. If
> there is an occational Ada related article in Dr. Dobbs then a lot of the FUD
> we are used to would go away.
> 
A very solid suggestion. Many technical publications have a hard enough
time getting articles at all, much less well written articles on
interesting subjects with a fresh, new approach. Getting Ada articles
published in places where normally one sees C++/Java/etc. helps expose
the language to those who might otherwise know nothing about it.

MDC
-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[Alfred Hilscher]

"Marin D. Condic" wrote:
> 
> Stanley R. Allen wrote:
> be hard to get too. I *do* know that finding qualified Ada programmers
> can be very difficult.

A short view from the other side: When I started work in 1986 I've got
an Ada job (in compiler development). But when our company dropped Ada I
had to look for a new job. Since then I work with CHILL. Every try to
get a new Ada job fails. When I asked for a job where Ada knowledge is
wanted, I always get the answer: "Sorry, but you does not fit our
needs". What needs ? I'm 39 years old, maybe this is the problem ? I
have long hair and wear jeans, is this the problem ?
I think one should not say "we don't find Ada people" if in fact he does
not want them either.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Alfred Hilscher]

"Tarjei T. Jensen" wrote:
> If I owned the company I would offer students prizes if they contributed useful
> software to the Ada community. The idea would be to organize small/medium
> projects which universities could use and then offer prizes for the best entry.
> Prizes could be a small grant/computer hardware or some other desirables.
> Perhaps also a contribution to the university, department or library. This
> would depend on their situation. In some parts of the world, just getting used

I think the Ada-Deutschland group do such things, but it seems to me
that this has no success.

> Lastly, a message from the campaign for mor technical Ada articles: You want
> Ada programmers? Write those articles in Dr. Dobbs and get Ada noticed. If
> there is an occational Ada related article in Dr. Dobbs then a lot of the FUD
> we are used to would go away.
> 
> The point is that we want to be able to say: Ada a dying language???? Just last
> year there were <number here> articles in Dr Dobbs about Ada projects.

That is exactly what I think. "Ada" should be omnipresent. But there is
a vicious circle:
a) There are no Ada articles, so people do not know about Ada.
b) People do not know about Ada, so magazines are not interessted in
Ada-articles.
c) goto a)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gary Scott]

Try Lockheed Martin at http://www.lmco.com

There are lots of Ada jobs (entry level and above, in fact there are a
lot of jobs period).  I assure you that being 39 years old with long
hair and a penchant for jeans is not a problem.

"Marin D. Condic" wrote:
> 
> Alfred Hilscher wrote:
> > A short view from the other side: When I started work in 1986 I've got
> > an Ada job (in compiler development). But when our company dropped Ada I
> > had to look for a new job. Since then I work with CHILL. Every try to
> > get a new Ada job fails. When I asked for a job where Ada knowledge is
> > wanted, I always get the answer: "Sorry, but you does not fit our
> > needs". What needs ? I'm 39 years old, maybe this is the problem ? I
> > have long hair and wear jeans, is this the problem ?
> > I think one should not say "we don't find Ada people" if in fact he does
> > not want them either.
> 
> Situations may vary. I know that we have security clearance issues and
> we have to present someone to the prime contractor that they will find
> acceptable. Locations can be an issue. Maybe there are plenty of Ada
> people available in, say Maryland, but not necessarily that many in
> Idaho. If you're filling slots in Idaho, it can be tough. Geography,
> problem domain, levels of experience required, etc. can all add up to
> making placement difficult.
> 
> MDC
> --
> ======================================================================
> Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
> Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
> Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/
> 
> "I'd trade it all for just a little more"
>     --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
> ======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

Alfred Hilscher wrote:

> That is exactly what I think. "Ada" should be omnipresent. But there is
> a vicious circle:
> a) There are no Ada articles, so people do not know about Ada.
> b) People do not know about Ada, so magazines are not interessted in
> Ada-articles.
> c) goto a)

True - but the Web is a chance to change it progressively, if you want...
Do you have a few nights to spend? Do you wish to make use of the
expressive power of Ada and the quality of a well-known free
compiler to produce a useful and/or funny piece of code ? Do it, post
it on the Web, drop a line on a few related newsgroups and it might
_have_ an effect. An ephemeral one, citations in Webzines. A long-term
one: some re-usable pieces of code. There is no need for a huge number
of programmers nor leading-edge, "pro" software. E.g. my little 3D
beginner experiments in Ada were "spontaneously" cited in the following
webzines: http://www.vis-sim.org/ , http://www.cfxweb.net/downloads.shtml ,
http://www.flipcode.com/ (search "Ada" in archives). A fortiori, if people
are better equipped (3D cards, GL/DirectX etc.) it could be even more
interesting! I'm sure that with some efforts like that (e.g. Pascal's
Web server) one can have more effects than just discussing in c.l.a ;-)
And since programming should not be a religious, abstract subject, what
about providing sources straight before the eyes of the Web surfer, like...
  http://www.neubert.net/Flacodes/FLACodes.html
  http://fedelma.astro.univie.ac.at/web/logiciel/swing/info.html
  http://www.swin.edu.au/astronomy/pbourke/projection/conrec/ada/
  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/lz__adb.htm
  http://members.xoom.com/_XMCM/gdemont/uza_html/index.htm
(...)
- as well as (g)zipped versions of course... The gnathtml.pl tool is there
that!
_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Marin D. Condic]

Alfred Hilscher wrote:
> A short view from the other side: When I started work in 1986 I've got
> an Ada job (in compiler development). But when our company dropped Ada I
> had to look for a new job. Since then I work with CHILL. Every try to
> get a new Ada job fails. When I asked for a job where Ada knowledge is
> wanted, I always get the answer: "Sorry, but you does not fit our
> needs". What needs ? I'm 39 years old, maybe this is the problem ? I
> have long hair and wear jeans, is this the problem ?
> I think one should not say "we don't find Ada people" if in fact he does
> not want them either.

Situations may vary. I know that we have security clearance issues and
we have to present someone to the prime contractor that they will find
acceptable. Locations can be an issue. Maybe there are plenty of Ada
people available in, say Maryland, but not necessarily that many in
Idaho. If you're filling slots in Idaho, it can be tough. Geography,
problem domain, levels of experience required, etc. can all add up to
making placement difficult.

MDC
-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Alfred Hilscher wrote
>"Tarjei T. Jensen" wrote:
>> If I owned the company I would offer students prizes if they contributed
useful
>> software to the Ada community. The idea would be to organize small/medium
>> projects which universities could use and then offer prizes for the best
entry.
>> Prizes could be a small grant/computer hardware or some other desirables.
>> Perhaps also a contribution to the university, department or library. This
>> would depend on their situation. In some parts of the world, just getting
used
>
>I think the Ada-Deutschland group do such things, but it seems to me
>that this has no success.

The point is that the effort must have a target. E.g. there must be a problem
to solve. The solution must be of value to someone. Only then is it worthwhile
to give a reward.


>That is exactly what I think. "Ada" should be omnipresent. But there is
>a vicious circle:
>a) There are no Ada articles, so people do not know about Ada.
>b) People do not know about Ada, so magazines are not interessted in
>Ada-articles.
>c) goto a)


Not true. Magazines need articles. An article featuring Ada has a good chance
of being published if it is of interest.

What we need articles for is to make it clear to those who might use Ada that
it is a viable solution.


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Gautier wrote:
>True - but the Web is a chance to change it progressively, if you want...
>Do you have a few nights to spend? Do you wish to make use of the
>expressive power of Ada and the quality of a well-known free
>compiler to produce a useful and/or funny piece of code ? Do it, post
>it on the Web, drop a line on a few related newsgroups and it might
>_have_ an effect. An ephemeral one, citations in Webzines. A long-term
>one: some re-usable pieces of code.


Still. Those who you want to reach are  more likely to make a decision based on
a presence in Dr Dobbs or another prestigous magazine than something on a
webzine. Being able to refer to articles in a paper magazine counts a lot more
than webzine citations when you are arguing with someone about the merits of
Ada and how much it is used. It is also worth a lot more when arguing for Ada
inside an organization.

However for solving a specific problem, it is good to be able to point to ready
made solutions like your own.


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

Certainly, a webzine has a null weight compared
to a true magazine "e-verba volant, scripta manent"!
However, I think that the web is a good mean of promotion;
a far effect of it can be more appearances in Dr Dobbs... 

G.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2044 bytes --]


Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> a �crit dans le message :
38FB4FA4.DCDCCAD7@maths.unine.ch...
> True - but the Web is a chance to change it progressively, if you want...
> Do you have a few nights to spend? Do you wish to make use of the
> expressive power of Ada and the quality of a well-known free
> compiler to produce a useful and/or funny piece of code ? Do it, post
> it on the Web, drop a line on a few related newsgroups and it might
> _have_ an effect.

I agree with that. Most of the time you heard "Ada can't do that", "Ada
can't be used in this field", "Ada can't whatever"... And now most of the
time it is possible to point the guy to the right Web page and the
discussion just stop there. Now with all the Ada code on the Web we
have almost anything in Ada...

> are better equipped (3D cards, GL/DirectX etc.) it could be even more
> interesting! I'm sure that with some efforts like that (e.g. Pascal's
> Web server) one can have more effects than just discussing in c.l.a ;-)

That was my point :) We have talked a *lot of time* on c.l.a about an all
Ada Web Sever so I have decided to start this project to have something
done. And now I have some contributions from various peoples, AWS can
now be used for simple/demo project.

Pascal.

--

--|------------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                               Team-Ada Member |
--|                                                           |
--| EDF-DER-IPN-SID- T T I                                    |
--|                       Intranet: http://cln46gb            |
--| Bureau N-023            e-mail: p.obry@der.edf.fr         |
--| 1 Av G�n�ral de Gaulle  voice : +33-1-47.65.50.91         |
--| 92141 Clamart CEDEX     fax   : +33-1-47.65.50.07         |
--| FRANCE                                                    |
--|------------------------------------------------------------
--|
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--|   "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[David Kristola]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 10:53:38 -0700, Gautier wrote
(in message <38FB4FA4.DCDCCAD7@maths.unine.ch>):
> True - but the Web is a chance to change it progressively, if you want... Do 
> you have a few nights to spend?

Not really.  ;-)

> Do you wish to make use of the expressive 
> power of Ada and the quality of a well-known free compiler to produce a 
> useful and/or funny piece of code ? Do it, post it on the Web, drop a line 
> on a few related newsgroups and it might _have_ an effect. 

I'm working on my end.  I hope to have a small MUD codebase
ready soon (actually 2, one for a competition, and a follow
up that is better all around, but still simple).

MUDs can be great teaching tools.  The simple ones address
a number of useful problems, and the complex ones dive into
many corners of computer science.


-- 
--djk, keeper of arcane lore & trivial fluff
Home: David95036 plus 1 at america on-line
Spam: goto.hades@welovespam.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <38F7A27A.4F7729FA@raytheon.com>,
	"Stanley R. Allen" <Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com> wrote:

>We should seriously question the assumption that it is easier to
>hire C++ vs. Ada programmers.  The entire Information Technology 
>industry is facing severe hiring problems, so the shortage of
>Ada programmers is at least in part a reflection of the more
>general situation.

Here is the U.S. it gets pretty silly sometimes.  Last week, yet
another senior military officer pronounced in an influential meeting,
"Ada is dead."  Readers of this forum will undestand that it was a
stupid thing to say, but those withing listening range will deferentially
nod in agreement, as if this absurdity actually had any meaning.  

When someone who issues such a banality is challenged with the question,
"So the alternative to Ada is what?" the usual answer is C++ or, even
worse, Java.  This answer demonstrates a deficit of understanding at
such a high level in the Department of Defense that one wonders if those
making important decisions are being inadvertantly advised by people
with agendas other than the construction of reliable software.  

Who does influence the language selection decision within a large organization?
One could reasonably ask whether that influence is guided by the economic
interests of those who stand to make the most money from products and 
services related to those decisions.  Large companies with deep pockets are
not building Ada compilers and tools.  

We once had a congressional lobbyist, funded by the Ada Resource Association,
going to the "Hill" to make our case.  For a long time we had Ralph Crafts
visiting Senators and Congressmen to make the case for Ada.  At present, we
have no one making the case.  No one is visiting DoD officials, government
officials, congresspersons, senators, or anyone else with influence.  No
one is writing any articles, press releases, or anything else that finds its
way into the consciousness of those making decisions.  

Why has no one ever written a press release for ComputerWorld, or published
an advertisement in ComputerWorld, Government Computer Week, or other general
publications in the computer field announcing that their Ada compiler is used
for the Boeing 777 or the Channel Tunnel, or the Fokker 100, or brings you
your nightly newscast via a communications satellite?   

The perception of many senior military officials concurs with that of officer
mentioned earlier in this article.  His ignorance is not his own fault.  It is
the fault of those of us who fail to get the message more broadly disseminated.

OK.  I guess I need to write and publish more articles.  For the past two years
I have been tied up with other things.  I'll try to get some writing done and
see if anyone still wants to publish an occasional article about Ada.  It would
be nice to have the facts about some good projects to include in such articles,
though.  No one wants to read my ranting without the seasoning of a few good
anecdotes.  

Anyone else out there able to write a set of entertaining and coherent sentences
for publication to improve visibility?   

Hint:  If you are planning to write about Ada for publication, your article should
       be first about the solution to some problem, and second about Ada.  Most
       editors are not interested in Ada because they have so few readers who care
       about Ada.  However, when you can demonstrate a project in which Ada was an
       important part of the solution space, they will be open to the article, not
       because of the Ada but in spite of it. 
 
Richard Riehle

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <8dhu82$dcc4@ftp.kvaerner.com>,
	"Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> wrote:

>Still. Those who you want to reach are  more likely to make a decision based on
>a presence in Dr Dobbs ...

Good points you make, Tarjei.  As a matter of interest, the Editor of 
Dr. Dobbs once told me he would love to have an in-depth article on the
use of Ada in the Boeing 777.  Someone would need to research it, get 
permissions from Boeing, get quotes from pilots, include some snippets 
of code, and fill out the text with interesting stuff.  It could be really
good article if a couple of people have the wherewithal to make it a
reality.

Also, I once suggested to the CEO of one of the compiler publishers that
all of those involved in supplying Ada compilers for the Boeing 777 should
purchase a full-page article in Fortune, Business Week or the like with 
a picture of the Boeing 777.  The caption could read, "Ada Airlines" and 
then each company could list its name and website.  I still think it is a
good idea, but the Ada compiler publishers are too timid to do it, I suppose.

Richard Riehle
 

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Chris Johnston]

I live about a half-mile from a Raytheon building and until now had no idea
what they did. Thanks

> <PRIDE>
> Raytheon also builds the full up trainer used to train the flight crew,
> the mission controllers, some payloads operators at remote sites etc.
> Increasingly, the simulator is being used as a validation test bed for
> some of the MDMs and software issues although that wasn't its purpose.
> </PRIDE>

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert B. Love]

In <8eclae$afj$1@slb7.atl.mindspring.net> Richard D Riehle wrote:
> Here is the U.S. it gets pretty silly sometimes.  Last week, yet
> another senior military officer pronounced in an influential meeting,
> "Ada is dead."  

Care to name him?  I sometimes write Congresscritters.  No reason why
I can't write this officer, if I knew where to address the envelope.

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Bob Love                                   
 rlove@neosoft.com                            
----------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Desirability of C++

[Keith Thompson]

"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> writes:
[...]
> Of course, C++ in its present form cannot be the final answer.
> Perhaps it can evolve into a more robust language
> which supports all of the safety features of Ada.
> Stronger type checking
> and support for concurrent programming
> might be a good place to start.

I don't believe C++ can be made significantly more robust without
breaking backward compatibility, either with the current version of
C++ or with C.  (C++'s near backward compatibility with C is one of
its biggest selling points.)  It would be possible to add new features
that make it easier to write safe code, but any change that breaks
existing (unsafe) code would be politically impossible.

It would be possible to create a new language with Ada's robustness
that looks more like C and/or C++.  (Java might be a step in that
direction, but I don't know it well enough to judge that.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Welcome to the last year of the 20th century.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ted Dennison]

In article <390D001C.7433140B@netwood.net>,
  "E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote:

> Fewer people are learning and using Ada

Do you have some statistics that suggest this, or is it just a statement
of belief? Considering that this thread is about countering
misinformation, it would be a shame to start promulgating new fallacies.

Every vendor who has talked about it here in the last few years has said
their sales are going up. But that doesn't mean much either. A vendor
with decling sales would probably not want to brag about it. :-)

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ted Dennison]

In article <390D62E0.366B54CC@maths.unine.ch>,
  Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> wrote:
> Pascal Obry:
>
> * Tradition: how many "What's this... ? Ada ?" "Why not just program
> in Fortran (C, COBOL,...) like your grandfather did ?" "Is there a

:-)

Computer Science is a very young discipline, perhaps 50 years old or so.
So using 30 year old tools and techniques is the programming equivalent
of Amish farming. Thus I have a general rule that I avoid doing anything
serious with programming languages older than I am.

For me that allows me C (barely), but current undergrads have no such
excuse. But I guess for current undergrads, that might throw out Ada too.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Ada on International Space Station (Re: where can we get a job with ada)

[Ted Dennison]

In article <dcLO4.17436$fV1.125450@news1.atl>,
  "Chris Johnston" <webmaster@brownshoe.net> wrote:
> I live about a half-mile from a Raytheon building and until now had no
idea
> what they did. Thanks
>
> > Raytheon also builds the full up trainer used to train the flight

Well, don't get ahead of yourself here. They also build parts for tanks.
They build rockets and missiles and smartbombs (with Ada in them, btw.)
Who knows what the one near you is doing?

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Gautier wrote:

> Could C++ functions return things other than an integer or a pointer?

Of course.

> Or would there a simple way in C++
> to make arrays with bounds but no OO bloat.

Take a look at
The C++ Scalar, Vector, Matrix and Tensor class library

    http://www.netwood.net/~edwin/svmt/

> The frustration about performance
> would be in the direction you mention.
> No, seriously, it's rather a problem of "pointy hair bosses"
> who read more the words "C++" or "Java" in magazines -
> or maybe the lack of a really sexy "Ada Visual Builder++"
> from Microsoft. Again, nothing with performance...

Does it matter?  The fact is that
more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
They have their reasons -- both good and bad.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pat Rogers]

"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
news:390D97DC.241E7CCD@netwood.net...

<snip>

> Does it matter?  The fact is that
> more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.

Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.

--
Pat Rogers                            Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
(281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Pat Rogers wrote:

> > Does it matter?  The fact is that
> > more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
>
> Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.

It isn't necessary to cite an authority
when you can determine the truth of the statement
directly through observation.

Are you maintaining that
more programmers are learning and using Ada than C++?
I didn't think so.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pat Rogers]

"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
news:390D9E0C.9C28DAD6@netwood.net...
> Pat Rogers wrote:
>
> > > Does it matter?  The fact is that
> > > more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
> >
> > Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.
>
> It isn't necessary to cite an authority
> when you can determine the truth of the statement
> directly through observation.

I consider it highly unprofessional to present as fact that which one
cannot prove.


--
Pat Rogers                            Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
(281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages

Re: Desirability of C++

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <390D9E0C.9C28DAD6@netwood.net>, "E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> writes:
> Pat Rogers wrote:
> 
>> > Does it matter?  The fact is that
>> > more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
>>
>> Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.
> 
> It isn't necessary to cite an authority
> when you can determine the truth of the statement
> directly through observation.

That observation has to be quite painstaking, as I don't think
anyone should rightly count those who are programming in C but
using a compiler capable of C++.

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:

> That observation has to be quite painstaking,
> as I don't think anyone should rightly count
> those who are programming in C
> but using a compiler capable of C++.

Should we count Pascal programmers
who have learned just enough Ada
to use an Ada compiler?

Re: Desirability of C++

[David Starner]

On Mon, 1 May 2000 10:56:14 -0500, Pat Rogers <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote:
>"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
>news:390D97DC.241E7CCD@netwood.net...
>
><snip>
>
>> Does it matter?  The fact is that
>> more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
>
>Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.

I'm not sure what it matters, but I've got a lot of indirect evidence:
* The C++ class at college runs every semester and is full. The Ada class 
runs every other semester and was canceled this semester due to lack of 
interest.
* Look at what books for what languages are on the shelves of a book store.
* Look at the Linux distributions. Debian, the only one I know of to actually
include GNAT, has no non-Ada related programs in the distribution. Many 
programs written in C++ are in the distribution.
* Look at Debian's popularity contest. 700 people have G++ installed, with
500 having upgraded or used it recently. 40 people have GNAT installed, with
22 having upgraded or used it recently.

I don't think it wins Ada anything for Ada supporters to deny the obvious.
More programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada. The appropriate answer
is "So?", not "Let me close my eyes and demand that you prove it."

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org

The hell that is supposedly out there could be no worse than
the hell that is sometimes seen in here.

Re: Desirability of C++

[David Starner]

On 1 May 2000 17:43:52 GMT, David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> wrote:
>* Look at the Linux distributions. Debian, the only one I know of to actually
>include GNAT, has no non-Ada related programs in the distribution.  
                                             ^written in Ada
Sorry.

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org

The hell that is supposedly out there could be no worse than
the hell that is sometimes seen in here.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pat Rogers]

"David Starner" <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> wrote in message
news:8ekfoo$8q61@news.cis.okstate.edu...
> On Mon, 1 May 2000 10:56:14 -0500, Pat Rogers
<progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote:
> >"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
> >news:390D97DC.241E7CCD@netwood.net...
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> Does it matter?  The fact is that
> >> more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
> >
> >Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.
>
> I'm not sure what it matters, but I've got a lot of indirect
evidence:

<snipped observations>

> I don't think it wins Ada anything for Ada supporters to deny the
obvious.
> More programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada. The
appropriate answer
> is "So?", not "Let me close my eyes and demand that you prove it."


Personal observations are fine -- that's what most of us are limited
to citing.  What I object to is use of the word "fact" for what turns
out to be one person's personal observations, which must, by
definition, be limited in scope.  He presented as fact that which was
not.  No IMHO, no IMO, just "fact" and yes it does annoy me when
people who should know better do it.  It especially annoys me when
they have an agenda to push.  By that standard it is also a "fact"
that C++ is dead and Java has taken over.  Likewise it is "fact" that
nobody programs in COBOL or FORTRAN any more.

--
Pat Rogers                            Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
(281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

Hyman Rosen:

> What does that mean? C++ functions can return things other than integers
> and pointers, and there is a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds
> but no OO bloat.

Sorry if I'm wrong - maybe it is the over-abundance of C-like sources.
Is there an online, HTML ISO standard reference ?
For the arrays, I'd really like to see the way you program things like
  "procedure Some_algo( A: matrix; x: out vector; b: vector ) is..."
with "A'range(1)" and so on, with possibility of having bound checking on.

> While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
> main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.

Hum... and how do you explain the huge popularity of Turbo/Borland Pascal ?
The lack of Ada's popularity until the past few years (thanks to GNAT) is
rather due to the refrigerating effect of the policy the DoD had - IMHO.
And the fact Ada came too early for the 16-bit, low Mhz personal computer wave.

About syntax: I think it's rather a question of personal taste and practice.

Is it worse to have the eye swimming from an ill-formatted over-uppercased
Ada source than from a mass of {&*^++[) spotted among tricky identifiers and
some comments trying to half-hide, half-explain what happens on the left ?

Simply, there is a great variety of writing styles, in C, Ada,.... There are
Fortran-like Ada sources, Pascal-like C or Fortran sources, and so on...

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ted Dennison]

In article <87og6qnld8.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>,
  Florian Weimer <fw-usenet@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> wrote:
> dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) writes:
>
> I wonder if there's a single piece of non-trivial free software
> written in Ada which is not Ada-related.  Can you name one?

That's *exactly* the situation that I think needs to be changed. When
(if) I get my thesis done and OpenToken in stable shape, I'll be looking
for just such a project to take on. But in the meantime, it would be
nice to see someone else make moves along this line.

If I was looking to start one today, I think I'd go for a web browser. I
know there are tons of them, but there aren't that many out there that
are fully open source. Even fewer are cross-platform and GPL. The only
one I know of is Lynx.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ted Dennison]

In article <lykP4.4078$ln5.88486@news.swbell.net>,
  "Pat Rogers" <progers@NOclasswideSPAM.com> wrote:
> they have an agenda to push.  By that standard it is also a "fact"
> that C++ is dead and Java has taken over.  Likewise it is "fact" that
> nobody programs in COBOL or FORTRAN any more.

By that standard, its also a fact that all languages except Fortran and
C++ are dead, and C++ is just for limited uses. That's the way things
are on the commercial side of my employer, and apparently I get to use
any random set of personal observations I want to craft "facts". :-)

I think it is truly a fact that there is a much wider panoply of tools
in use than many folks like to admit. Perhaps there's some inborn desire
for conformity that causes people to so desperatly want to see
consistency where in there is none. Or perhaps its just the
pattern-matching nature of our brains.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Lionel Draghi]

Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
...
> 
> These numbers aren't very meaningful.  For example, I use GNAT
> regularly on Debian, but I prefer to use J�rgen Pfeifer's RPMs.  Of
Are you using both Debian and Redhat? Why do you prefer the later,
aren't they both providing the same thing?

Lionel Draghi.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Brian Rogoff]

On Mon, 1 May 2000, Gautier wrote:
> Hyman Rosen:
> > While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
> > main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.

Hard to believe. Turbo Pascal/Delphi, as Gautier points out, and even VB 
uses BEGIN/END. 

> > Even after many attempts, I still can't look at a chunk of Ada code
> > without my eyes swimming from the mass of undifferentiated text. 

A colorizing editor might help here. I use Emacs, but I believe VIM also 
has this ability.

I am actually somewhat in agreement with your complaint, and I wish there 
were more available operators in Ada, and that arrays used "[]", etc. 
Still, superficial syntactic annoyances are really not that important.

> Hum... and how do you explain the huge popularity of Turbo/Borland Pascal ?
> The lack of Ada's popularity until the past few years (thanks to GNAT) is
> rather due to the refrigerating effect of the policy the DoD had - IMHO.

This sounds closer to the truth...

> And the fact Ada came too early for the 16-bit, low Mhz personal computer wave.

And this even more so. Masses of programmers were trained on small
machines which had C compilers but not Ada compilers. When the machines 
got bigger they probably found it easier to switch to C++ which was a
fairly small language in the mid-1980s.

> About syntax: I think it's rather a question of personal taste and practice.
> 
> Is it worse to have the eye swimming from an ill-formatted over-uppercased
> Ada source 

I think Hyman's complaint has more to do with the fact that
"punctuation" in Ada looks like regular text, than with formatting issues,
and that his eyes would swim from well formatted code too. As I said, 
colorization or even bold/italics/... would help a lot with this issue.

-- Brian

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Ted Dennison wrote:

> I think that it is truly a fact that
> there is a much wider panoply of tools in use
> than many folks like to admit.
> Perhaps there's some inborn desire for conformity
> that causes people to so desperately want to see consistency
> where in there is none.
> Or perhaps it's just the pattern matching nature of our brains.

No.  It's not quite as simple as that.
Developers can invest more time and energy
in popular, commercially viable tools.
Generally, optimizing C and C++ compilers are better
than optimizing Ada compilers
simply because more compiler developers can afford
to invest in them than in optimizing Ada compilers.
More popular languages like C and C++
can evolve faster than less popular languages like Ada
because library developers can get the money
required to keep up with compiler maintenance.
For similar reasons, C and C++ are available
for a much wider variety of target platforms than Ada.

The point is that there are very real considerations
which prejudice programmers
against Ada in favor of C or C++.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
> main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.
> Even after many attempts, I still can't look at a chunk of Ada code without
> my eyes swimming from the mass of undifferentiated text. If the designers
> had gone with {/} instead of is/begin/end, this could have been a different
> world. (And yes, I know that the internationalists wouldn't hear of using
> curly braces back then.)

I don't agree at all.

I think that the standard library is the main problem. I stronly believe
that the designers have tried to encompass too many platforms. E.g. I
think text-io is suitable for reports only and we should have gotten
something more suitable for PC/Unix style programming.

I think a lot of the strings stuff is dinosaur stuff (probably very nice
for real time, but not wonderful for general computing stuff). The
impression is that there is too much copying going on. I think Borland
made the right decision on strings when they selected counted strings
for Turbo Pascal/Delphi even if they are limited to 255 characters or
less. And I think they made the right decision about how to handle
string assignment, compares, etc.

As of now everybody have to do their own stuff. That means misery until
someone creates something that everybody think is wonderful and starts
to use.

I think that the library was what made C. It was brilliant in its
simplicity. Everything fit nicely to what many people want to do
(especially those who write tools). It seems to have handled change
reasonably well.


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pat Rogers]

"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
news:390DDBED.D17B9A05@netwood.net...

<snip>

> No.  It's not quite as simple as that.
> Developers can invest more time and energy
> in popular, commercially viable tools.
> Generally, optimizing C and C++ compilers are better
> than optimizing Ada compilers
> simply because more compiler developers can afford
> to invest in them than in optimizing Ada compilers.

Here we go again.  Including the word "generally" does not prevent
this from being another unsupported assertion.  In my experience the
Ada compilers do better, but so what?


--
Pat Rogers                            Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
(281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen]

Pascal Obry wrote:
> 
> Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen a �crit dans le message
> <390D47A3.740E3FD1@online.no>...
> >That is not true. More people know how to program in Ada this year than
> >last year. Because a lot of people learn Ada as their first programming
> >language (thanks to gnat). Even here in Norway it is moving in that
> >direction. And in the (norwegian) programming groups there seem to be a
> >concensus that pascal like programming languages are far better than C
> >languages, at least when one tries to learn to program.
> >
> 
> I agree with you that Ada is a very good first programming language. Here is
> a paradox that has always puzzled me. A lot of peoples agree that:
> 
> - Ada is very good first programming language
> 
> - Ada is very good for high quality, safety critical, large scale softwares
> 
> Why is there so little Ada projects in the middle ?
> 

It takes time. Remember there was "not much" C stuff out there for a
long time. Only after FSF started rolling do we get the really big C
revolution. Simplified you could say that people spendt a lot of time
with just C, lex, yacc and make.


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[tmoran]

> I wonder if there's a single piece of non-trivial free software
> written in Ada which is not Ada-related.  Can you name one?
  I don't known your criteria for non-trivial, but I posted some
years ago an Ada program to make a computer (PC AT) into a TV
studio teleprompter with a large font and smooth scrolling.
Another program read SoundBlaster VOC files and played them
through the PC's speaker.  That one was downloaded a *lot* from
Compuserve and I later saw it on a "free sound programs" CDROM.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen]

Ted Dennison wrote:
> > I wonder if there's a single piece of non-trivial free software
> > written in Ada which is not Ada-related.  Can you name one?
> 
> That's *exactly* the situation that I think needs to be changed. When
> (if) I get my thesis done and OpenToken in stable shape, I'll be looking
> for just such a project to take on. But in the meantime, it would be
> nice to see someone else make moves along this line.
> 
> If I was looking to start one today, I think I'd go for a web browser. I
> know there are tons of them, but there aren't that many out there that
> are fully open source. Even fewer are cross-platform and GPL. The only
> one I know of is Lynx.

I think there is at least two web browsers for gnome. There is at least
one on kde.

I think the web server bit would be more profitable nut to crack. Apache
and perl is the main competitor. Zope and python may be coming
attractions.

I think there could be done a lot of work on safety and optimization. It
should be possible to improve safety quite a lot with simple means. It
would also be nice to actually be able to read and understand the server
source code.

Safety is a big concern these days with web shops. If one can show off
something that is reasonably safe the market is yours.

Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ted Dennison]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2669 bytes --]

In article <390DF15E.233B7D1E@online.no>,
  "Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen" <tarjei@online.no> wrote:
> Ted Dennison wrote:
> > If I was looking to start one today, I think I'd go for a web
> > browser. I know there are tons of them, but there aren't that many
> > out there that are fully open source. Even fewer are cross-platform
> > and GPL. The only one I know of is Lynx.
>
> I think there is at least two web browsers for gnome. There is at
> least one on kde.

But those aren't cross-platform, right? There are a couple out there for
the Amiga too. That's not my point.

Suppose I want to use only a GPL or LGPL web browser for
philisophical/self-preservation reasons. Further suppose that I want one
that I can use on my Win2k system, my wife's Win98 system, and a SunOs,
HP/UX, or SGI box I use at work. It might even be nice if my parents'
iMac can run it. Is there anything out there that does that? I'd
honestly be interested in finding out about it. Netscape comes close,
but its license is right on the edge of OpenSource, making it really
just a big commercial product in OpenSource clothing. For instance it
tries to integrate functionality that has nothing to do with web
browsing (eg: email, newsgroups, chat, streaming news or whatever's
fashionable today) that should properly be handled by the separate
external application of my choice. Why does Mozilla/Netscape integrate
this? The same reason Microsoft integrated their web server into the OS:
business positioning. But why should *I* be inconvienced to help improve
AOL's business position?

> I think the web server bit would be more profitable nut to crack.
> Apache and perl is the main competitor. Zope and python may be coming
> attractions.

Apache is sort of the model I'm thinking of here. Apache is dominant as
*the* GPL solution. I use it at home on my Win2k box to proxy web
accesss to my home LAN, and am quite happy with it. I'd like to see a
project (done in Ada) that has a chance of acheiving that kind of
dominance. I don't think web servers are the place to look for that
because there already *is* one. But when I look for something similar in
a browser, its very tough to find.

But then, I'm probably not a typical Apache user, and you seem to know
way more about web servers than I do. So perhaps there is a niche there
that I'm blind to. (AWS seems like a credible start in that direction.)

As programmers we all have our own itches to scratch. At the moment *my*
biggest one happens to be web browser (as you can no doubt tell from the
diatribe above).

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Michael P. Walsh]

Pat Rogers wrote:

> "E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
> news:390D9E0C.9C28DAD6@netwood.net...
> > Pat Rogers wrote:
> >
> > > > Does it matter?  The fact is that
> > > > more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
> > >
> > > Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.
> >
> > It isn't necessary to cite an authority
> > when you can determine the truth of the statement
> > directly through observation.
>
> I consider it highly unprofessional to present as fact that which one
> cannot prove.
>
> --
> Pat Rogers                            Consulting and Training in:
> http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
> progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
> (281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages

This is a peculiar remark about a comment presented in
an Usenet newsgroup.  These are not necessarily regarded
as requiring professional status to post.

Also the comment of the number of C++ programmers as
compared to Ada programmers seems to be borne out by
a comparison of the number of media references and, in
my case, by general contact with various software
people.

Of course, there may be a problem in counting C++ programmers
as compared to general use of other versions of the C language
but Ada, as far as I can tell is being used primarily on large
software programs that have high requirements for reliability.
It does not seem to be in general use in commercial software.

The problem may well be that C++ is being used in a number
of places where Ada would be preferable, but that isn't the
point of this particular remark.

Mike Walsh

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

"E. Robert Tisdale":

> Generally, optimizing C and C++ compilers are better
> than optimizing Ada compilers

It remembers me an advertisement: "The G3 processor
is faster than the slowest Pentium II" (ditto!).
Maybe you are right, maybe not.
Did you seriously compare ?
It would be interesting - really. Don't hesitate to
give names (on platform/OS aaaa, C compiler bbbb is faster
than Ada compiler cccc with the test dddd), because your argument:

> simply because more compiler developers can afford
> to invest in them than in optimizing Ada compilers.

is challenged by the fact that some of these compilers
(in the expensive class) do excellent optimisations
surely because the buyers (spatial/military/...?) spend/spent
much money on them....

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pat Rogers]

"Michael P. Walsh" <mp_walsh@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:390DFAF3.325601ED@pacbell.net...
>
> Pat Rogers wrote:
>
> > "E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> wrote in message
> > news:390D9E0C.9C28DAD6@netwood.net...
> > > Pat Rogers wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Does it matter?  The fact is that
> > > > > more programmers are learning and using C++ than Ada.
> > > >
> > > > Cite references, please.  Otherwise you are propagating myth.
> > >
> > > It isn't necessary to cite an authority
> > > when you can determine the truth of the statement
> > > directly through observation.
> >
> > I consider it highly unprofessional to present as fact that which
one
> > cannot prove.


> This is a peculiar remark about a comment presented in
> an Usenet newsgroup.  These are not necessarily regarded
> as requiring professional status to post.

Of course one need not be a professional to post, but that doesn't
change the -- IMHO -- unprofessional nature of presentation of opinion
as fact.  One person's experience does not constitute industry-wide
fact.  I view it to be a matter of professional ethics.

> Also the comment of the number of C++ programmers as
> compared to Ada programmers seems to be borne out by
> a comparison of the number of media references and, in
> my case, by general contact with various software
> people.

That's just my point -- your *experience* says 'X' is the case and so
you quite rightly qualify it with "seems", rather than state it to be
a fact.  I'm objecting to the propagation of unfounded personal
experience as general fact.  I likewise object to the "fact" that C++
is dead and that Java has taken over based on the number of media
references, etc.

> Of course, there may be a problem in counting C++ programmers
> as compared to general use of other versions of the C language
> but Ada, as far as I can tell is being used primarily on large
> software programs that have high requirements for reliability.
> It does not seem to be in general use in commercial software.

Agreed.

> The problem may well be that C++ is being used in a number
> of places where Ada would be preferable, but that isn't the
> point of this particular remark.

Agreed.

--
Pat Rogers                            Consulting and Training in:
http://www.classwide.com      Deadline Schedulability Analysis
progers@classwide.com        Software Fault Tolerance
(281)648-3165                       Real-Time/OO Languages

Re: Desirability of C++

[Keith Thompson]

"E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin@netwood.net> writes:
[...]
> I think that the next evolutionary step for C++
> will break backward compatibility.
> The new C9X (C99?) standard is incompatible with C++
> so there is already incentive for C and C++ to diverge.

C++ might diverge further from C, but it will be very difficult to
make any changes to the C++ standard that break existing C++ code.
Much of the existing C++ code conforms to the current standard, but
uses the unsafe features that C++ inherited from C.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Welcome to the last year of the 20th century.

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

The fact is that
it is a beautiful sunny day here in Malibu.

Will you accept the fact?
Or do I need to cite an authority on beautiful sunny days?

Re: Desirability of C++

[tmoran]

>made the right decision on strings when they selected counted strings for
>Turbo Pascal/Delphi even if they are limited to 255 characters or less.
  How do those differ from
    ... is new Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length(255);

Re: Desirability of C++

[David Starner]

On 01 May 2000 21:03:47 +0200, Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.cygnus.argh.org> wrote:
>dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) writes:
>
>> * Look at the Linux distributions. Debian, the only one I know of to actually
>> include GNAT, has no non-Ada related programs in the distribution. Many 
>> programs written in C++ are in the distribution.
>
>I wonder if there's a single piece of non-trivial free software
>written in Ada which is not Ada-related.  Can you name one?

No. I've been working in that direction, but all of my free
software work has been haphazard.

>> * Look at Debian's popularity contest. 700 people have G++ installed, with
>> 500 having upgraded or used it recently. 40 people have GNAT installed, with
>> 22 having upgraded or used it recently.
>
>These numbers aren't very meaningful.

They are a self-selected group, but automatically reported. I can't think of 
any massive bias either way, so IMO the numbers are roughly accurate.

>For example, I use GNAT
>regularly on Debian, but I prefer to use J�rgen Pfeifer's RPMs.  

Why? (If you'd prefer to take it off the newsgroup into email, I'd understand,
but as a fellow Debian user and (hopefully) future maintainer, I'm really
interested in the answer.)

-- 
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org

The hell that is supposedly out there could be no worse than
the hell that is sometimes seen in here.

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Richard D Riehle wrote:

> [snip]
>
> Anyone who chooses C++ over Ada
> for a safety-critical DoD software system either
> 1) does not understand C++,
> 2) does not understand Ada,
> 3) does not understand either or
> 4) has an agenda based on criteria other than
>     the relative merits of the technologies.

Still, the fact is that Ada has been on life support from the start.
It doesn't seem to have much of a future.
Fewer people are learning and using Ada
so it is harder to justify investment in really good
optimizing Ada compilers.  Consequently,
you can hardly blame frustrated programmers
for abandoning Ada in favor of C++.

Of course, C++ in its present form cannot be the final answer.
Perhaps it can evolve into a more robust language
which supports all of the safety features of Ada.
Stronger type checking
and support for concurrent programming
might be a good place to start.
Meanwhile, C++ programmers will be obliged
to incorporate safety features into their class libraries
and do more extensive (expensive) runtime testing.

I'm not sure that I'm ready to pronounce Ada dead yet
but I think that Ada programmers
should prepare themselves for the inevitable.
Nothing, not even a programming language, lives forever.

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Keith Thompson wrote:

> I don't believe C++ can be made significantly more robust
> without breaking backward compatibility,
> either with the current version of C++ or with C.
> (C++'s near backward compatibility with C
>  is one of its biggest selling points.)
> It would be possible to add new features
> that make it easier to write safe code,
> but any change that breaks existing (unsafe) code
> would be politically impossible.
>
> It would be possible to create a new language
> with Ada's robustness that looks more like C and/or C++.
> (Java might be a step in that direction,
>  but I don't know it well enough to judge that.)

I think that the next evolutionary step for C++
will break backward compatibility.
The new C9X (C99?) standard is incompatible with C++
so there is already incentive for C and C++ to diverge.
I don't think that Java is a good model
for a more robust C++ (Ada++?).
Garbage collection is incompatible
with real time programming.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen]

E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
> 
> Richard D Riehle wrote:
> 
> > [snip]
> >
> > Anyone who chooses C++ over Ada
> > for a safety-critical DoD software system either
> > 1) does not understand C++,
> > 2) does not understand Ada,
> > 3) does not understand either or
> > 4) has an agenda based on criteria other than
> >     the relative merits of the technologies.
> 
> Still, the fact is that Ada has been on life support from the start.
> It doesn't seem to have much of a future.
> Fewer people are learning and using Ada
> so it is harder to justify investment in really good
> optimizing Ada compilers.  Consequently,
> you can hardly blame frustrated programmers
> for abandoning Ada in favor of C++.

That is not true. More people know how to program in Ada this year than
last year. Because a lot of people learn Ada as their first programming
language (thanks to gnat). Even here in Norway it is moving in that
direction. And in the (norwegian) programming groups there seem to be a
concensus that pascal like programming languages are far better than C
languages, at least when one tries to learn to program.

There seem to be quite a few who use Ada to create interesting software.

And these people who knows Ada have something that almost nobody else
has; they know that it takes a lot more time to get a C++ program out
the door than a similar Ada program. The last estimate I saw was from
someone who estimated that he spent two to four times as much time to
debug his C++ code than his Ada code (it was a project which had half of
each).


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen]

Richard D Riehle wrote:
> On top of that, the interpretation, by many, of former Assitant
> Secretary of Defense Paige's memo, is that Ada is no longer a DoD
> language.  It is a stupid interpretation and completely wrongheaded,
> but people will read what they want into it.  Notice the plethora
> of articles at the time of the publication of that memo that declared
> that Ada was "dead."  How can we blame military officers for mistakenly
> thinking it is dead when they read that it is in popular magazines
> such as Dr. Dobbs and Government Computing News.


There seem to be nobody who want to write articles featuring Ada in
either Dr. Dobbs and Government Computing News. Until someone does, it
is going to look bad for Ada even though the companies involved may be
making more money.

The least the Ada industry association (or whatever it is called) could
do if the market is in fact growing, is to put out an occational press
release which shows that the market are growing. If I were a shareholder
in any of the companies that would be the least I would expect. 

The ada industry looks very much like where I work (just a slight
twist). When there are good times, nobody have the time to do anything
about cost reduction. When the times are bad, they refuse to invest in
cost reduction. However they will spend a lot of time telling everybody
that they cannot afford to use any money. Some time they will spend more
time arguing and telling how poor they are than it would take for the
developers to implement the feature.


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

"E. Robert Tisdale":

> Still, the fact is that Ada has been on life support from the start.
> It doesn't seem to have much of a future.

These noises are the "strange attractor" that always tends to bring
programming languages back to the 1960s. Interesting to compare with
the evolution of hardware that is boosted by true comparisons...

> Fewer people are learning and using Ada
> so it is harder to justify investment in really good
> optimizing Ada compilers.

Too late, they exist! (OK: some of them are still Ada83)

> Consequently, you can hardly blame frustrated programmers
> for abandoning Ada in favor of C++.

Could C++ functions return things other than an integer or a pointer,
or would there a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds but no OO bloat,
the frustration about performance would be in the direction you
mention. No, seriously, it's rather a problem of "pointy hair bosses" who read
more the words "C++" or "Java" in magazines - or maybe the lack of a really
sexy "Ada Visual Builder++" from Microsoft. Again, nothing with
performance... 

> Of course, C++ in its present form cannot be the final answer.
> Perhaps it can evolve into a more robust language
> which supports all of the safety features of Ada.
> Stronger type checking
> and support for concurrent programming
> might be a good place to start.

Then a more advanced modularity, increased features for types
other than the basic ones and a more readable syntax - important.
I'm sure C2010 will ressemble much to a known language ;-)

> Nothing, not even a programming language, lives forever.

Mmmmh you are killing a bit early these almost eternal languages:
 - COBOL (now OO, script, versions in SAP)
 - Fortran (now Visual compilers for PC, parallelised for supercomputers,
   soon a Fortran 200X with generics and maybe OO!)
and:
 - that famous macro-assembler... Hey, what's its name ? It served to
   make Unix... I really can't remember its name...
   You know, they made a version with a "++"...

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

Pascal Obry:

> I agree with you that Ada is a very good first programming language. Here is
> a paradox that has always puzzled me. A lot of peoples agree that:
> 
> - Ada is very good first programming language
> 
> - Ada is very good for high quality, safety critical, large scale softwares
> 
> Why is there so little Ada projects in the middle ?

* In the middle you find programs (OSes, Word processors,...) that are crippled
  by bugs, but that poeple accept to buy without warranty, and even rebuy with
  the same bugs, for years !
* For an employed programmer, "project finished" can mean "danger, prepare your CV"
  so it is better to facilitate the emergence and long life of bugs.
* Psychology: a Fortran program will always look more scientific, a C/C++ more
  technical and less academic, and so on
* Tradition: how many "What's this... ? Ada ?" "Why not just program in Fortran
  (C, COBOL,...) like your grandfather did ?" "Is there a compiler ?" "Oh that...
  it will never compile!" [a true one from numerics area - now they use GNAT :-)]
  and so on - with eyebrowes like that: "\/".

(imho!)  
_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

"Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen":

> That is not true. More people know how to program in Ada this year than
> last year. Because a lot of people learn Ada as their first programming
> language (thanks to gnat). Even here in Norway it is moving in that
> direction. And in the (norwegian) programming groups there seem to be a
> concensus that pascal like programming languages are far better than C
> languages, at least when one tries to learn to program.

Something I've observed also: people who have learned C at first year
of Uni see at a glance the difference. An Ada source is the best ambassador...
What seems to hit the eye:
 - One can read what it does !
 - Oh, one can return a string ?!
 - Oh, I can make a vector, a matrix ? "for i in A'range(1) loop" ?!

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ken Garlington]

"Richard D Riehle" <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:8eclae$afj$1@slb7.atl.mindspring.net...
> Here is the U.S. it gets pretty silly sometimes.  Last week, yet
> another senior military officer pronounced in an influential meeting,
> "Ada is dead."  Readers of this forum will undestand that it was a
> stupid thing to say, but those withing listening range will deferentially
> nod in agreement, as if this absurdity actually had any meaning

I can't speak for "senior military officers," but I know that some
Government employees lower in the hierarchy have a preference, at least for
safety-critical systems. On a very recent project, during one of the very
first briefings I gave, one of the questions was (and I believe this is a
nearly-exact phrasing), "You guys are still going to be using Ada, right?"

This has been a real problem for us, in fact, given that some of our
projects want to use DSPs to implement their safety-critical systems (which
certainly seems reasonable), but Ada doesn't have nearly as broad a
representation in that market as C, and it is quite a bit more expensive for
us to use Ada on those systems.

> Why has no one ever written a press release for ComputerWorld, or
published
> an advertisement in ComputerWorld, Government Computer Week, or other
general
> publications in the computer field announcing that their Ada compiler is
used
> for the Boeing 777 or the Channel Tunnel, or the Fokker 100, or brings you
> your nightly newscast via a communications satellite?

Well, the press releases have certainly been written. I posted one recently
on this newsgroup. It's just a question of getting them seen by people that
care.

I'm not sure that it matters anymore what Government program officers think
about software languages. Assume they wanted Ada. What would they do about
it? The acquisition initiatives prevent them from specifying requirements at
this level; even the safety requirements have been watered down
significantly (IMHO). They can indicate _outcomes_ (e.g., error rates of the
delivered software) but not the _means_ by which they're met. Couple that
with the drive to use COTS, etc. and it's tough to get excited about a
language, from their perspective. I suppose they could jawbone the
contractors (as described above), but that's about it.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <4F706057FEE2A550.BF5FE19AE279EFCD.A55706B3F9D07043@lp.airnews.net>,
	rlove@antispam.neosoft.com (Robert B. Love ) wrote:

>In <8eclae$afj$1@slb7.atl.mindspring.net> Richard D Riehle wrote:
>> Here is the U.S. it gets pretty silly sometimes.  Last week, yet
>> another senior military officer pronounced in an influential meeting,
>> "Ada is dead."  
>
>Care to name him?  I sometimes write Congresscritters.  No reason why
>I can't write this officer, if I knew where to address the envelope.

Sorry, Robert.  I have gotten myself into more than enough
trouble over the years by naming names.  In fact, it doesn't
matter, in this case that we don't have the actual person's
name.  It is, sad to say, a widespread belief within the military
and, more recently among military contractors.   More important,
such pronouncements are not made maliciously, nor are they intended
to create yet more conflict in the language wars.  Rather, they 
reflect the influence of very bad advice from civilian organizations
with vested interests in other technologies.  

On top of that, the interpretation, by many, of former Assitant 
Secretary of Defense Paige's memo, is that Ada is no longer a DoD 
language.  It is a stupid interpretation and completely wrongheaded, 
but people will read what they want into it.  Notice the plethora
of articles at the time of the publication of that memo that declared
that Ada was "dead."  How can we blame military officers for mistakenly
thinking it is dead when they read that it is in popular magazines
such as Dr. Dobbs and Government Computing News.  

My current group of students was required to take a class in C++
as one of their preparatory courses for the program in which they
are enrolled.  When I ask the question, "Would you want to fly in 
an aiplane that depends on software written in C++?" they almost
unanimously answer, "No."   Meanwhile, contractors and others are
happily building software with C++.  To their credit, those 
contractors are deeply concerned about the quality of their product,
and some have indicated that, the deployed software must be reliable
regardless of what language is used.  

In my opinion, not often witheld, the defect density of software 
written in C++ is very likely to be higher than that written in 
Ada.  Moreover, it is more difficult to locate those defects as
early in the software lifecycle as it is with Ada.  

So when someone from the DoD says, "Ada is dead," and then answers
the question of "What is the alternative?" with "C++,"  I find myself
getting really annoyed at the poor advice these folks are getting.
And that is just the point.  Every senior officer in the military,
every DoD official, every DoD contractor, wants to produce quality
software.  They rely on advice from others to do so.  The advice
they get is from people with heavy investments in selling technology,
and services, mostly for languages other than Ada.  
 
Now that Secretary Paige is no longer in the DoD to champion the cause
of Ada, we need to find some mechanism to alert these senior decision
makers to the need for selecting the appropriate language for high quality
software, particularly in weapons systems. Our approach should not be to 
nag these senior officials but to find some way to raise their level of 
awareness about the dangers of the alternative technologies.  

Anyone who chooses C++ over Ada for a safety-critical DoD software system 
either 1) does not understand C++, 2) does not understand Ada, 3) does 
not understand either, or 4) has an agenda based on criteria other than
the relative merits of the technologies.  

Richard Riehle  

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1185 bytes --]


Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen a �crit dans le message
<390D47A3.740E3FD1@online.no>...
>That is not true. More people know how to program in Ada this year than
>last year. Because a lot of people learn Ada as their first programming
>language (thanks to gnat). Even here in Norway it is moving in that
>direction. And in the (norwegian) programming groups there seem to be a
>concensus that pascal like programming languages are far better than C
>languages, at least when one tries to learn to program.
>


I agree with you that Ada is a very good first programming language. Here is
a paradox that has always puzzled me. A lot of peoples agree that:

- Ada is very good first programming language

- Ada is very good for high quality, safety critical, large scale softwares

Why is there so little Ada projects in the middle ?

Pascal.

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[Marin D. Condic]

Gautier wrote:
> mention. No, seriously, it's rather a problem of "pointy hair bosses" who read
> more the words "C++" or "Java" in magazines - or maybe the lack of a really
> sexy "Ada Visual Builder++" from Microsoft. Again, nothing with
> performance...
> 
That's the most likely reason. While I agree that it would help a lot to
get more articles published in journals, there is nothing quite like the
advantage of having Microsoft put a shrink-wrapped box on a gondola in a
computer store. Its visible and exposes the product to those who never
heard of it with a high power endorsement. That and having a bunch of
GUI tools and other pre-packaged utilities makes it attractive to
developers.

I'd like to see such a package sitting on a shelf next to Microsoft's
Visual C++ kit. Perhaps with something like Claw for a GUI builder and
some nicely documented interfaces to system services, etc. We do lots of
stuff around here in C++ not because it is better than Ada, but because
we can slap together an application much more quickly with the MFC
available to us.

MDC
-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[Hyman Rosen]

Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> writes:
> Could C++ functions return things other than an integer or a pointer,
> or would there a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds but no OO bloat,
> the frustration about performance would be in the direction you  mention.

What does that mean? C++ functions can return things other than integers
and pointers, and there is a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds
but no OO bloat.

> Then a more advanced modularity, increased features for types
> other than the basic ones and a more readable syntax - important.
> I'm sure C2010 will ressemble much to a known language ;-)

While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.
Even after many attempts, I still can't look at a chunk of Ada code without
my eyes swimming from the mass of undifferentiated text. If the designers
had gone with {/} instead of is/begin/end, this could have been a different
world. (And yes, I know that the internationalists wouldn't hear of using
curly braces back then.)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Florian Weimer]

dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) writes:

> * Look at the Linux distributions. Debian, the only one I know of to actually
> include GNAT, has no non-Ada related programs in the distribution. Many 
> programs written in C++ are in the distribution.

I wonder if there's a single piece of non-trivial free software
written in Ada which is not Ada-related.  Can you name one?

> * Look at Debian's popularity contest. 700 people have G++ installed, with
> 500 having upgraded or used it recently. 40 people have GNAT installed, with
> 22 having upgraded or used it recently.

These numbers aren't very meaningful.  For example, I use GNAT
regularly on Debian, but I prefer to use J�rgen Pfeifer's RPMs.  Of
course I've installed GCC as well, including the C++ frontend, but I
haven't worked on C++ code during the last few months (I've compiled
software written in C++, though).

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

Brian Rogoff wrote:

> I think Hyman's complaint has more to do with the fact that
> "punctuation" in Ada looks like regular text, than with formatting issues,
> and that his eyes would swim from well formatted code too. As I said,
> colorization or even bold/italics/... would help a lot with this issue.

Ok. About this topic, AdaGIDE does colorise nice.
For printing/postscript copy, the standard LaTeX package Listings produces an
irresistible result (bold/italics/..., proportional fonts but correct column
alignment) - really an eye-catcher ;-) ! For hypertext, the "gnathtml" tool
does an impressive job (sucessful gnatmake -> gnathtml -> a complete sub-web
site with all hyperlinks, coloured texts, frames, indexes!) e.g.
  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/uza_html/index.htm

G.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

tmoran@bix.com wrote:

> >made the right decision on strings when they selected counted strings for
> >Turbo Pascal/Delphi even if they are limited to 255 characters or less.
>   How do those differ from
>     ... is new Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length(255);

The whole package is for the TP "String[255]" type only. If you have
sorts of "String[80]" here, "String[20]" there, and so on, it means an
instance of the whole package Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length
for each maximum length, with whole code for all operators, with conversion
issues, renaming of the different Bounded_String etc.! If you simply define...

package BorStrings is

  type BorString( maxlength: positive ) is private;
...
private
  type BorString( maxlength: positive ) is record
    length: Natural:= 0;
    s: String( 1..maxlength );
  end record;
  -- NB: length allows longer strings than the "s[0]" in T/B-Pascal

end BorStrings;

you can have all of TP strings at once, with one type, one package!
In addition, translation from TP/Delphi is much easier

"var s: string[255]"      -> "s: borstring(255)"
"type t_ident=string[100] -> "subtype t_ident is borstring(100)"

and so on :-). IMHO the day of creation of Ada.Strings.Bounded was
a bad one...

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen]

Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> writes:

> Hyman Rosen:
> 
> > What does that mean? C++ functions can return things other than integers
> > and pointers, and there is a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds
> > but no OO bloat.
> 
> Sorry if I'm wrong - maybe it is the over-abundance of C-like sources.

You can do it in C as well. Example

typedef struct foo{
  float re;
  float im;
}foo;

foo bar(){
   foo foo1;
   return foo1;
}

> Is there an online, HTML ISO standard reference ?
> For the arrays, I'd really like to see the way you program things like
>   "procedure Some_algo( A: matrix; x: out vector; b: vector ) is..."
> with "A'range(1)" and so on, with possibility of having bound checking on.
> 

No luck with range checking or array bounds, you have to use vector
classes to get that.

> > While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
> > main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.
> 
> Hum... and how do you explain the huge popularity of Turbo/Borland Pascal ?
> The lack of Ada's popularity until the past few years (thanks to GNAT) is
> rather due to the refrigerating effect of the policy the DoD had - IMHO.
> And the fact Ada came too early for the 16-bit, low Mhz personal computer wave.
> 

It was cheap, very fast compile times, IDE, produced reasonable code,
and had extensions to standard Pascal which made it useful. The fact
that it was Pascal did not matter much, I think.
BTW., personally I don't care whether you write {} or BEGIN/END.

> About syntax: I think it's rather a question of personal taste and practice.
> 
> Is it worse to have the eye swimming from an ill-formatted over-uppercased
> Ada source than from a mass of {&*^++[) spotted among tricky identifiers and
> some comments trying to half-hide, half-explain what happens on the left ?
> 
> Simply, there is a great variety of writing styles, in C, Ada,.... There are
> Fortran-like Ada sources, Pascal-like C or Fortran sources, and so on...
> 
> _____________________________________________
> Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

-- 
E pluribus Unix

Re: Desirability of C++

[Al Christians]

tmoran@bix.com wrote (re Turbo Pascal strings):
> 
>   How do those differ from
>     ... is new Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length(255);

1. They arrived in usable form about 15 years sooner.  

2. Less code bloat from multiple types with different maximum
lengths in the same program.

3. No type-checking problems when mixing strings of different maximum
lengths in assignments and expressions.  Every string is a string, and
all the string operations and the whole library of string functions will 
operate on all of them (cf Ada 95).   This certainly has a downside, but 
the obvious inconveniences of Ada 83 string operations must have cost 
Ada quite a bit of acceptance.   Compared even to Ada 95, the rules for 
Turbo Pascal string handling are somewhere in the gray area between 
liberty, license and anarchy.  Somehow, people,   particularly young 
male software developers, seem to like that kind of stuff (cf C/C++).

Before Ada 83, the most popular vaguely similar language with the best 
support for structured programming was  probably PL1, which was used in 
about 10-15% of mainframe shops according to surveys I saw.  So, the PL1
programmers were the best shot at early adopters to popularize Ada, 
if that were to happen.  They would have been particularly likely 
suspects as they expanded from the mainframe to PC, for the PL1
implementations for the PC were also scarce and limited. But string 
handling with Ada 83 was no fun compared even to PL1 as of 1965, so Ada 
would not have been an easy  sell even if there were good and 
competitively priced Ada compilers for DOS PC's back in the 80's.


Al

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Richard D Riehle wrote
>Also, I once suggested to the CEO of one of the compiler publishers that
>all of those involved in supplying Ada compilers for the Boeing 777 should
>purchase a full-page article in Fortune, Business Week or the like with
>a picture of the Boeing 777.  The caption could read, "Ada Airlines" and
>then each company could list its name and website.  I still think it is a
>good idea, but the Ada compiler publishers are too timid to do it, I suppose.


That would require marketing. And horrors of horrors; people might notice that
Ada is not dead.


Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

tmoran@bix.com wrote in message ...
>>made the right decision on strings when they selected counted strings for
>>Turbo Pascal/Delphi even if they are limited to 255 characters or less.
>  How do those differ from
>    ... is new Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length(255);

Turbopascal/Delphi strings work the way strings should work with the exception
that one cannot get a new distinct type which you can in Ada with the new
keyword. It might not always be convenient to have all strings assignment
compatible. But regardless: The look and feel of turbopascal/delphi strings is
right. Add ada and it could be wonderful.

All strings are basically assignment compatible. You can write a := b; even if
a and b are of different sizes. And b might be declared larger than a, but as
long as the length of b is less or equal to the maximum size of a, assignment
works.

line : string[80];
short_line : string[40];

line := "Nice weather";

short_line := line;

Greetings,

Re: Application in Ada (was Desirability of C++)

[Ted Dennison]

In article <8em8mc$evd$2@wanadoo.fr>,
  "Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen.adalog@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
>
> Something that is really missing (AFAIK) is a free X server for
> windows. I got Mix, but it's an old version, more recent ones are no
> more free (gratis), and it never was free (freedom). I might  be
> misinformed, but I never found another one.

The XFree86 FAQ agrees with you. But given all the yucky C interfaces
that would have to be provided, I'd think writing the server in Ada
would be an "interesting" project in just about every sense of the word.
You might be able to save some time by cribbing some of the XFree86
folks' code and Ada-izing it. But you'd be racing for time against
groups that are working on straight C ports of XFree86.

One of the subgoals of an OpenSource project done in Ada should be to
(incedentally) win some mindshare for Ada by attracting hackers to the
project. Even if there is *no* C alternative, I suspect the project will
constantly have to be fighting off attmpts to "port" it to C by
conservative C hackers. Having an acceptable C alternative already
working would make the situation much more tenuous. However I firmly
believe the day will come when we are ready to fight and win that battle
too.

But more importantly for me, I have no use for an X server. Perhaps you
have some insight that tells you that my misgivings above are total BS,
or that I'm missing some important fact that makes the whole thing
feasable. By all means give it a shot if you think it'd work. After all,
*I* thought FAX machines were an incredibly dumb idea...

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

> > and so on :-). IMHO the day of creation of Ada.Strings.Bounded was
> > a bad one...

Jean-Pierre Rosen:

> Not at all. Variable_String is the perfect tool when you have an Abstract
> Data Type that you choose to *implement* as a String. For example, you may
> have a type Last_Name in your data base, and it makes perfect sense to
> implement it as a Bounded_String.
> You don't have one instantiation per maximum-length; you have one
> instantiation per abstraction. Think higher, please ;-)

Sorry, I'm a bit bold. And I the machine I'm using makes me think different,
but not higher at all!

But would you agree that your Variable_String [http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog/compo2.htm]
is missing as Ada.Variable_String ?

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Strings TP/Ada (was Desirability of C++)

[Gautier]

Preben Randhol:

> As I cannot remember much of turbopascal I curious:

> If you write in turbopascal.

> line : string[12];
> short_line : string[5];
> line := "Hello World!";
> short_line := line;

> would short_line be "Hello" or will it be altered to a string[12] and
> thus contain all of line?

No - the variable is not extensible (string[5] reserves 6 bytes on stack).
Will "Hello World!" be truncated or issue a range check error ? It may depend
on the state of the range check switch ({$R+/-}), the version of TP, the fast
library patches, and so on...

In fact string[N] is a predefined unconstrained type in TP (and the
only!), and corresponds to an array[0..N]. The 0th character contains the length.

Some nice things:
  - String (without [N]) means String[255]
  - A very Borlandesque one: the {$V+/-} switch (strict var checking)
    alters the language semantic where it appears and until the next one!
    Also as command-line, or in tpc.cfg, or as a check in option panel...
    When it is "on", you can pass as "var" (by reference) only variables
    of the same subtype as specified; when "off", all variables of type String !

So, don't applause too early the whole "Borland string model"... In addition, you can
program all that in Ada with unconstrained types, so it's not a so awful situation...

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert A Duff]

Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> writes:

> But would you agree that your Variable_String [http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog/compo2.htm]
> is missing as Ada.Variable_String ?

The designer of Ada.Strings.Unbounded (Ben Brosgol) considered doing it
as in the above-mentioned package.  The reason not to do it that way is
documented in the AARM -- assignment statements don't work properly.
That is, if you assign a 5-character string (whose max length is 80) to
a string variable whose max is 120, you will get a Constraint_Error,
even though 5 characters fit nicely in 120.  JPR points this out in the
documentation for his package, and he provides a procedure for copying
strings, which should be used instead of assignment.

Note that you can't tell by looking at the code (locally) whether or not
assignment is safe.

JPR's approach is fine, but the RM's approach is safer: instead of just
telling you "assignment doesn't work", it uses the type system to
prevent assignment in the cases that won't work.

Apparently, Turbo Pascal actually makes assignment work, which is
obviously preferable to either of the above Ada alternatives.  On the
other hand, there are lots of *other* things wrong with the Turbo Pascal
solution, which have been pointed out in this thread.

This thread sure is wandering!  I mean, it's hard to see how one can
explain the popularity of C or C++ by the fact that Turbo Pascal has
better strings than Ada (in one respect).  That was what was being
discussed, wasn't it?  ;-)

In fact, C-style strings are quite primitive, and quite painful to work
with, even compared to Ada 83 strings.

- Bob

Re: Desirability of C++

[Bill Greene]

E. Robert Tisdale wrote:
> 
> The fact is that
> it is a beautiful sunny day here in Malibu.
> 
> Will you accept the fact?
> Or do I need to cite an authority on beautiful sunny days?

I will accept your *opinion* that it was a beautiful sunny day at the
time and location that you posted.

-- 
William R. Greene                              1100 Perimeter Park Drive
Ganymede Software, Inc.                                        Suite 104
http://www.ganymede.com                       Morrisville, NC  27560 USA
Phone: (919) 469-0997, ext. 280                      Fax: (919) 469-5553

Re: Desirability of C++

[Keith Thompson]

randhol+nospam@pvv.org (Preben Randhol) writes:
[...]
> As I cannot remember much of turbopascal I curious:
> 
> If you write in turbopascal.
> 
> line : string[12];
> short_line : string[5];
> line := "Hello World!";
> short_line := line;
> 
> would short_line be "Hello" or will it be altered to a string[12] and
> thus contain all of line?

I've never used Turbo Pascal, but I believe it was based on UCSD
Pascal, which I have used.  In UCSD Pascal, an assignment like the
above would result in an overflow, which would terminate the program.
(The Ada equivalent would be to raise Constraint_Error.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
Welcome to the last year of the 20th century.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

"Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen":

> I think a lot of the strings stuff is dinosaur stuff (probably very nice
> for real time, but not wonderful for general computing stuff). The
> impression is that there is too much copying going on. I think Borland
> made the right decision on strings when they selected counted strings
> for Turbo Pascal/Delphi even if they are limited to 255 characters or
> less. And I think they made the right decision about how to handle
> string assignment, compares, etc.

Agreed - except that while you manipulate strings as expressions
it remains easy. Also slices. The variables are funnier...
Well there is Ada.Strings.Bounded, but with 1 package instance per
maximum length! Incidentally I just made a (pure Ada 83) BorStrings
package, see paqs.zip @
______________________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/gsoft.htm

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <t7r9bmjnf7.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com>,
	Hyman Rosen <hymie@prolifics.com> wrote:

>What does that mean? C++ functions can return things other than integers
>and pointers, and there is a simple way in C++ to make arrays with bounds
>but no OO bloat.

You are, of course, correct that C++, using the library classes can make
array management much easier than the low-level arrays usually constructed
by programmers.  The same is true of smart pointer classes.  I recently
did a little informal survey of students where I teach and none of them
had learned anything about this better aspect of C++.

>While C++ syntax can sometimes be abysmal, I am 100% convinced that the
>main reason for the lack of Ada's popularity is its Pascal-derived syntax.
>Even after many attempts, I still can't look at a chunk of Ada code without
>my eyes swimming from the mass of undifferentiated text. If the designers
>had gone with {/} instead of is/begin/end, this could have been a different
>world. (And yes, I know that the internationalists wouldn't hear of using
>curly braces back then.)

That Ada syntax is 1) intended to make the code more readable, 2) enable the 
compiler to ensure completeness of each statement, 3) ensure that the 
programmer does not forget any little details that could affect the final
logic of the program.  The abysmal C++ syntax (along with abysmal Java syntax) 
does permit incomplete statements, and does not give the compiler a fine-grained
semantics that would enable the level of compile-time error checking we
enjoy with Ada.  

As for curly-braces, we are already experience a worldwide shortage of this 
pair of punctuation marks. Worse, curly-braces are the crabgrass of computer 
programming.  They require no labeling, and even when labeled the compiler
does not check those labels.  They are inconsistently used throughout the
C family of languages.  This is one of the things Java could have fixed and,
for some odd reason chose to leave as is.  

The reasons for Ada's lack of popularity are far more complex than the absence
of curly braces.  It starts way back with the ineffectual management of the DoD
and the agencies charged with making Ada policy work.  It can, in part be laid
at the feet of compiler publishers, some of whom saw the opportunity to charge
outrageous prices for their product because the military had "mandated" the
language and there was no choice for them but to pay those prices.  It can be
seen in the demand from the DoD to use the Ada language for projects for which
there was no compiler technology available and the resulting resentment of those
who had to find a way around the policy.   It can be found in the checkbox 
compilers that no one expected to be any good but which satisfied the checkbox
on the bidding form that asked if there were a validated Ada compiler.  I could 
go on, but readers of this forum have heard this before.  The point is, the lack
of curly braces is not a significant issue in the low popularity of Ada. 

I have had the opportunity over the past few years to get better acquainted with
C++.  The more I study C++, the deeper my realization that it is a dangerous choice
for any software in which human safety is involved.  Ada still has significant
advantages over C++ in that domain.  My earlier statements about C++ versus Ada
stand.  Any technologically savvy decision-maker who chooses C++ over Ada for a
safety-oriented software product is making that decision for reasons other than the
relative technical benefits of the language.  

Richard Riehle
richard@adaworks.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[Florian Weimer]

Lionel Draghi <Lionel.Draghi@free.fr> writes:

> > These numbers aren't very meaningful.  For example, I use GNAT
> > regularly on Debian, but I prefer to use J�rgen Pfeifer's RPMs.  Of

> Are you using both Debian and Redhat? 

Yes, Debian at home and Red Hat at the university.

> Why do you prefer the later, aren't they both providing the same
> thing?

Actually, no.  The RPMs provide symbolic tracebacks and a GNAT-enabled
GDB which works most of the time.  In addition, there are RPMs for
Florist and other bindings.  The last time I checked, binaries linked
against the shared runtime library (i.e., GNARL) didn't even run on
the other system.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Florian Weimer]

Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes:

> > I think the web server bit would be more profitable nut to crack.
> > Apache and perl is the main competitor. Zope and python may be coming
> > attractions.
> 
> Apache is sort of the model I'm thinking of here. Apache is dominant as
> *the* GPL solution. 

I've read this claim many times, but in fact, Apache is not GPL
software (see http://www.apache.org/LICENSE.txt, the license is even
at the border to GPL incompatibility).

> As programmers we all have our own itches to scratch. At the moment *my*
> biggest one happens to be web browser (as you can no doubt tell from the
> diatribe above).

If I were better at GUI hacking (and had more time), I would rewrite
the Emacs display engine and enhance W3 accordingly.  Writing a decent
display engine is not easy, and this approach would ensure that it can
be used for things which are more important than viewing web pages. ;)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1125 bytes --]


Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> a �crit dans le message :
390E2A20.B647D0D6@maths.unine.ch...
> tmoran@bix.com wrote:
>
> > >made the right decision on strings when they selected counted strings
for
> > >Turbo Pascal/Delphi even if they are limited to 255 characters or less.
> >   How do those differ from
> >     ... is new Ada.Strings.Bounded.Generic_Bounded_Length(255);
>
Have a look at package Variable_String, available from
http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog/compo2.htm

>
> and so on :-). IMHO the day of creation of Ada.Strings.Bounded was
> a bad one...
>
Not at all. Variable_String is the perfect tool when you have an Abstract
Data Type that you choose to *implement* as a String. For example, you may
have a type Last_Name in your data base, and it makes perfect sense to
implement it as a Bounded_String.
You don't have one instantiation per maximum-length; you have one
instantiation per abstraction. Think higher, please ;-)

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog

Re: Application in Ada (was Desirability of C++)

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1034 bytes --]


Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> a �crit dans le message :
8ekn33$rim$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> That's *exactly* the situation that I think needs to be changed. When
> (if) I get my thesis done and OpenToken in stable shape, I'll be looking
> for just such a project to take on. But in the meantime, it would be
> nice to see someone else make moves along this line.
>
> If I was looking to start one today, I think I'd go for a web browser. I
> know there are tons of them, but there aren't that many out there that
> are fully open source. Even fewer are cross-platform and GPL. The only
> one I know of is Lynx.
>
Something that is really missing (AFAIK) is a free X server for windows. I
got Mix, but it's an old version, more recent ones are no more free
(gratis), and it never was free (freedom). I might  be misinformed, but I
never found another one.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog

Re: Desirability of C++

[Preben Randhol]

On Mon, 01 May 2000 22:08:42 GMT, Ted Dennison wrote:

>Suppose I want to use only a GPL or LGPL web browser for
>philisophical/self-preservation reasons. Further suppose that I want one
>that I can use on my Win2k system, my wife's Win98 system, and a SunOs,
>HP/UX, or SGI box I use at work. It might even be nice if my parents'
>iMac can run it. Is there anything out there that does that? I'd
>honestly be interested in finding out about it. Netscape comes close,
>but its license is right on the edge of OpenSource, making it really
>just a big commercial product in OpenSource clothing. For instance it
>tries to integrate functionality that has nothing to do with web
>browsing (eg: email, newsgroups, chat, streaming news or whatever's
>fashionable today) that should properly be handled by the separate
>external application of my choice. Why does Mozilla/Netscape integrate
>this? The same reason Microsoft integrated their web server into the OS:
>business positioning. But why should *I* be inconvienced to help improve
>AOL's business position?

I agree with you. What would be very interesting would be to make a�
XHTML browser. The reason is that HTML is very messy and can be
added later. So what one then need is a good XML parser in Ada. Then one
need an engine for formating the text, tables and pictures. And then�
a general GUI API. Then one can add a OS spesific GUI interface
in whatever library on top. For Linux/UNIX, Win2k one could use
GTK+ (or something else) and if one wants to have a text-only browser
one could use ncurse or something to display the pages. I expect that
one could make this into a server-client design?


PS: A small tip to those who use deja.com to post. If using netscape you
are seemingly stuck with the rather cumbersome forms-interface. I use
the text-only browser w3m which uses an external editor to edit text, so
if you set it up right you can have it invoke vim, emacs, pico etc...
W3M is located at < http://ei5nazha.yz.yamagata-u.ac.jp/~aito/w3m/eng/ >
if you are interested.

-- 
Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- <http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/>
         "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling."
                                                      -- Athol Fugard

Re: Desirability of C++

[Preben Randhol]

On Tue, 2 May 2000 14:32:50 +0200, Tarjei T. Jensen wrote:

>line : string[80];
>short_line : string[40];
>
>line := "Nice weather";
>
>short_line := line;
>

As I cannot remember much of turbopascal I curious:

If you write in turbopascal.

line : string[12];
short_line : string[5];
line := "Hello World!";
short_line := line;

would short_line be "Hello" or will it be altered to a string[12] and
thus contain all of line?

-- 
Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- <http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/>
         "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling."
                                                      -- Athol Fugard

Re: Application in Ada (was Desirability of C++)

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1761 bytes --]


Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> a �crit dans le message :
8emo1d$21p$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> One of the subgoals of an OpenSource project done in Ada should be to
> (incedentally) win some mindshare for Ada by attracting hackers to the
> project. Even if there is *no* C alternative, I suspect the project will
> constantly have to be fighting off attmpts to "port" it to C by
> conservative C hackers. Having an acceptable C alternative already
> working would make the situation much more tenuous. However I firmly
> believe the day will come when we are ready to fight and win that battle
> too.
Good point, but multi-tasking can be a plus for an X-server, and something
that could keep C-hackers from translating...

> But more importantly for me, I have no use for an X server. Perhaps you
> have some insight that tells you that my misgivings above are total BS,
> or that I'm missing some important fact that makes the whole thing
> feasable. By all means give it a shot if you think it'd work. After all,
> *I* thought FAX machines were an incredibly dumb idea...
>
Typically, it's useful for all people (like me) who carry a laptop under
WinXX, and connect it at work to a network of Unix machines. Sometimes you
want to use the laptop as a terminal...
It can also be useful to some projects that use the X interface even under
WinXX, because they want portability of the user interface, and the project
started on Unix machines (of course I KNOW there are alternatives, I'm just
saying that such projects exist - Escadre (http://escadre.cad.etca.fr:1815)
is a big example).

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog

Re: Desirability of C++

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1182 bytes --]


Gautier <gautier.demontmollin@maths.unine.ch> a �crit dans le message :
390EEF24.BD36AA24@maths.unine.ch...
> But would you agree that your Variable_String
[http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog/compo2.htm]
> is missing as Ada.Variable_String ?
>
The difficult point is to what extent should libraries go to the standard.
In 83, the line of the party was that there was no need to put libraries
that could easily be written by the user; that was the reason for not having
complex types, for example. In 95, it was recognized that this lead too
often to people rewriting all the time the same modules with slightly
different interfaces, and the borderline was moved to include more
libraries - but certainly not all libraries that could be useful, or even
desirable.

In this example, the question is whether this very simple functionnality was
worth presenting a fourth variation of strings. Clearly a judgement call,
someone had to make a decision, and it was no. People who need this are
welcome to download it :-)

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog

Re: Application in Ada (was Desirability of C++)

[Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen]

Ted Dennison wrote:
> 
> But more importantly for me, I have no use for an X server. Perhaps you
> have some insight that tells you that my misgivings above are total BS,
> or that I'm missing some important fact that makes the whole thing
> feasable. By all means give it a shot if you think it'd work. After all,
> *I* thought FAX machines were an incredibly dumb idea...


If you want more suggestions, you will have to provide some more clues
to your computing environment and your interests.


Helsingar,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Paul Graham]

Pascal Obry wrote:
> That was not my point. The problem is not the name, the problem is that
> C does not have a string type so there is no operator on them =, <, >, :=
> and no attribute 'Length, 'Last, 'First...

You can take 'Length of a STRING, but not 'Length of a Bounded_String. 
For Bounded_String, you are back to using functional notation:
Length(s), which is just like you have for C.  (The difference being
that Length(s) is presumably a constant time operation for
Bounded_String in Ada, but a linear time operation for char * in C.)

It is annoying when an "improved" version of a type loses some
operations over the basic version.  So much for "referential
transparency".

Or is it possible to write something like:

    for Bounded_String'Length use Length(Bounded_String);

?

Paul

Re: Application in Ada (was Desirability of C++)

[Ted Dennison]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 945 bytes --]

In article <391083C5.76042117@online.no>,
  "Tarjei Tj�stheim Jensen" <tarjei@online.no> wrote:
> Ted Dennison wrote:

> If you want more suggestions, you will have to provide some more clues
> to your computing environment and your interests.

:-)
I'm not really looking for suggestions. As I said previously, I have
lots of ideas (just like everyone else). Time is what I don't
(currently) have. I can't really justify starting a new project when
I've still got a thesis to write and several backlogged enhancements to
a current project.

But since everyone seems to love to come up with these suggestions, I
will mention that one of the ideas I had was for a meta-project which
would list good project ideas that could be persued. The focus would be
on filling empty software niches with Ada-written OpenSource software.

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert A Duff]

Paul Graham <pgraham@cadence.com> writes:

> It is annoying when an "improved" version of a type loses some
> operations over the basic version.  So much for "referential
> transparency".

True, although I miss indexing and literals more than attributes.

> Or is it possible to write something like:
> 
>     for Bounded_String'Length use Length(Bounded_String);
> 
> ?

No.  That's not allowed.

- Bob

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert I. Eachus]

Robert A Duff wrote:
   
> ...Apparently, Turbo Pascal actually makes assignment work, which is
> obviously preferable to either of the above Ada alternatives.

    I guess I don't see this.  In Ada, you have several choices: String,
Bounded_String, and Unbounded_String.  Each is appropriate in different
places, and, yes it can be painful if you are forced--by ignorance or
management--to use the wrong abstraction for the job at hand.

    But when an instance of Bounded_String is the appropriate choice, it
has always been my experience that you WANT the compiler to reject
assignments between objects with different maximum sizes.  That is
almost always either a bug or a situation that code to handle the
potential mismatch.  If you really get upset about explicit conversions,
then instantiate Bounded_String once, with the maximum of all the
maximum sizes.

    The other thing to note is that having multiple instances of
Bounded_Strings in your program cannot result in code bloat.  Hint: 
Write a program that reads a number from Current_Input, then calls a
subroutine that recursively calls itself and on each call, instantiates
Ada.Strings.Bounded for a different maximum length:

     function Recur(N: Natural) return String is
        package BS is new Ada.Strings.Bounded(N);
     begin
        if N > 0
        then
          return Recur(N-1) & 'X';
        else return "";
        end if;
        return end Recur;
     -- put in some code that exercises the instance if you want... 

  How many copies of the code for Ada.Strings.Bounded are there in your
executable? Can you call Recur with a larger value of N?
  
> This thread sure is wandering!  I mean, it's hard to see how one can
> explain the popularity of C or C++ by the fact that Turbo Pascal has
> better strings than Ada (in one respect).  That was what was being
> discussed, wasn't it?  ;-)

    The popularity of C and C++ with many programmers is easy to
explain.
Ada asks too many questions!  For software engineers who know what they
are doing, programming in Ada is very easy:  Find all the answers to the
hard questions that need to be asked as part of the design process, then
let the code write itself.  But for those whe are used to finding a 75%
or 90% or even 99% solution and never considering the rest of the hard
questions, programming in Ada is a nightmare.

     Back in the early days of Ada, we ran an experimental course to
teach Ada to a group of experienced software engineers, who had been
programming in assembler.  It quickly became obvious that a large
portion of the class was never going to be able to compile and run a one
page Ada program.  We then switched tacks, and took a group that already
knew Pascal, and taught them Ada.  Much easier, and much more
successful.  We then looked at the results more closely and found that
there really was no difference--if software engineers could program in
Pascal or Algol or PL/I, they could easily learn to program in Ada.  The
high barrier was learning some of the key concepts of software
engineering.  Much later I discovered that if you taught software
engineering and used Ada as a mode of expression, you wound up with
software engineers who could program in Ada.  (And incidently, I have
also found from experience that it is not difficult to do software
engineering in C or C++.  But teaching software engineering in C is
impossible.  In fact, remember the earlier question:  Why are there more
C and C++ programmers than Ada programmers?  The answer is simple.  I
don't know any Ada software engineers who can't program in C as well.  C
is fairly easy to learn, there are a few glitches that can catch unwary
programmers once or twice, but the C Puzzle Book type of code does not
belong in anything written to be maintained, so I don't miss it at all.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Preben Randhol wrote
>
>As I cannot remember much of turbopascal I curious:
>
>If you write in turbopascal.
>
>line : string[12];
>short_line : string[5];
>line := "Hello World!";
>short_line := line;
>
>would short_line be "Hello" or will it be altered to a string[12] and
>thus contain all of line?


You would get either a runtime error or a compile time error. I don't remember
which.

Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Tarjei T. Jensen]

Robert A Duff wrote
>The designer of Ada.Strings.Unbounded (Ben Brosgol) considered doing it
>as in the above-mentioned package.  The reason not to do it that way is
>documented in the AARM -- assignment statements don't work properly.
>That is, if you assign a 5-character string (whose max length is 80) to
>a string variable whose max is 120, you will get a Constraint_Error,
>even though 5 characters fit nicely in 120.  JPR points this out in the
>documentation for his package, and he provides a procedure for copying
>strings, which should be used instead of assignment.


A more natural conclusion would be that there was a language problem. In order
to fix it one would either have to make the compiler aware of strings, make it
possible to tell the compiler about what controls the size of a variable sized
object like a counted string or make it possible to override the assignment
operator.

It would be convenient to be able to tell the compiler how to access the
character array in string types other than the ordinary ada string. It would
save a lot of copying. And it should be quite safe since routines that use the
ordinary string types cannot change the length of the string.

>Apparently, Turbo Pascal actually makes assignment work, which is
>obviously preferable to either of the above Ada alternatives.  On the
>other hand, there are lots of *other* things wrong with the Turbo Pascal
>solution, which have been pointed out in this thread.


I think it was the ucsd-pascal people who first got it right.

>This thread sure is wandering!  I mean, it's hard to see how one can
>explain the popularity of C or C++ by the fact that Turbo Pascal has
>better strings than Ada (in one respect).  That was what was being
>discussed, wasn't it?  ;-)
>
>In fact, C-style strings are quite primitive, and quite painful to work
>with, even compared to Ada 83 strings.


C has only one string type. It works reasonably well. Probably the most
important "feature" is that everything is by reference, so there is no problems
with strings of different sizes, etc.

Greetings,

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert A Duff]

"Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@earthlink.net> writes:

> Robert A Duff wrote:
>    
> > ...Apparently, Turbo Pascal actually makes assignment work, which is
> > obviously preferable to either of the above Ada alternatives.
> 
>     I guess I don't see this.  In Ada, you have several choices: String,
> Bounded_String, and Unbounded_String.  Each is appropriate in different
> places, and, yes it can be painful if you are forced--by ignorance or
> management--to use the wrong abstraction for the job at hand.

I was only talking about cases where bounded strings *are* appropriate.
In that case, a comparison can be made between the Ada and Turbo Pascal
support.  (Several dialects of Pascal had similar features, actually.)

>     But when an instance of Bounded_String is the appropriate choice, it
> has always been my experience that you WANT the compiler to reject
> assignments between objects with different maximum sizes.

I don't see why.  It makes perfect sense to assign a max-5 string into a
max-10 string, and it can't fail at run time.  I could understand
wanting to reject assignments from max-10 to max-5, because otherwise
that might fail at run time.

>...  That is
> almost always either a bug or a situation that code to handle the
> potential mismatch.  If you really get upset about explicit conversions,
> then instantiate Bounded_String once, with the maximum of all the
> maximum sizes.

Then you waste memory on the strings that could have been small.
If you think different max sizes are useful at all, then surely
you will want to make different choices in different cases.

>     The other thing to note is that having multiple instances of
> Bounded_Strings in your program cannot result in code bloat.

Surely you don't mean "cannot".  If you write 16 instantiations of
Ada.Strings.Bounded in your program, you will get 16 copies of the code,
on most compilers.  Perhaps you mean that a clever compiler could share
the code?

>...Hint: 
> Write a program that reads a number from Current_Input, then calls a
> subroutine that recursively calls itself and on each call, instantiates
> Ada.Strings.Bounded for a different maximum length:
> 
>      function Recur(N: Natural) return String is
>         package BS is new Ada.Strings.Bounded(N);
>      begin
>         if N > 0
>         then
>           return Recur(N-1) & 'X';
>         else return "";
>         end if;
>         return end Recur;
>      -- put in some code that exercises the instance if you want... 
> 
>   How many copies of the code for Ada.Strings.Bounded are there in your
> executable? Can you call Recur with a larger value of N?

One.  But it's not terribly useful, being inside a recursive function
where I can't get at it.

- Bob

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert A Duff]

"Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> writes:

> You would get either a runtime error or a compile time error. I don't remember
> which.

The sizes of the strings is not known at compile time, in general.

- Bob

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert A Duff]

"Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> writes:

> Robert A Duff wrote
> >The designer of Ada.Strings.Unbounded (Ben Brosgol) considered doing it
> >as in the above-mentioned package.  The reason not to do it that way is
> >documented in the AARM -- assignment statements don't work properly.
> >That is, if you assign a 5-character string (whose max length is 80) to
> >a string variable whose max is 120, you will get a Constraint_Error,
> >even though 5 characters fit nicely in 120.  JPR points this out in the
> >documentation for his package, and he provides a procedure for copying
> >strings, which should be used instead of assignment.
> 
> A more natural conclusion would be that there was a language problem. 

That *was* the conclusion.

>...In order
> to fix it one would either have to make the compiler aware of strings, make it
> possible to tell the compiler about what controls the size of a variable sized
> object like a counted string or make it possible to override the assignment
> operator.

All of those changes were considered too big.

> It would be convenient to be able to tell the compiler how to access the
> character array in string types other than the ordinary ada string. It would
> save a lot of copying. And it should be quite safe since routines that use the
> ordinary string types cannot change the length of the string.
> 
> >Apparently, Turbo Pascal actually makes assignment work, which is
> >obviously preferable to either of the above Ada alternatives.  On the
> >other hand, there are lots of *other* things wrong with the Turbo Pascal
> >solution, which have been pointed out in this thread.
> 
> I think it was the ucsd-pascal people who first got it right.

They got some things right, and some things wrong.  For example, the
limit of 255 characters is pretty annoying -- even in the bad old days
of smaller memories.

> C has only one string type.

C doesn't even have a character type, much less a string type!  It has
an integer type called char, it has pointers to [arrays of] those, it
has character literal and string literal notations, it has a
nul-termination convention, and a few library routines.  But it doesn't
have the most basic things you want, such as carrying the length with
the string, comparison operators, assignment operator.

>... It works reasonably well. Probably the most
> important "feature" is that everything is by reference, so there is no problems
> with strings of different sizes, etc.

- Bob

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert A Duff]

"Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen.adalog@wanadoo.fr> writes:

> In this example, the question is whether this very simple functionnality was
> worth presenting a fourth variation of strings.

Well, it wouldn't have been a *fourth* one.  If we had chosen to do it
your way, it would have been *instead* of the bounded strings package we
ended up with.  Therefore, it would not have added complexity.  The
issue was purely whether assignment should fail at run time (as in your
version) versus prevented at compile time (the RM version) -- that
issue, traded off against the extra annoyance of having to instantiate
the thing all over the place.

All in all, I think your package is better than the RM one, despite the
fact that it's less safe.

- Bob

Re: Desirability of C++

[Wes Groleau]

> Here in the Ada world, we tend to think that nothing is "standard",
> sometimes not even usable, before it has been rubber-stamped by ISO.
> A LOT of useful stuff in other languages is pretty "standard" without having
> ever been endorsed by any official body. Yes, making libraries widely

Indeed, some of the new things in Ada 95 are formalizations of what were
previously "de facto standards."


-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau

Re: Desirability of C++

[Paul Graham]

Pascal Obry wrote:
> Even to compare two strings you have to write:
>    if (strcmp (name1, name2) == 0) {
>       ...
> I do prefer:
>    if name1 = name2 then
>       ...

Just because the standard library provides a somewhat unreadable
function like strcmp doesn't mean you have to use it directly.  In C you
can write:

    if (StrEqual(name1, name2)) {
	...
 
assuming an appropriate definition of StrEqual.  You can also write:

    if (StrIEqual(name1, name2)) {
	...

for case-insensitive comparisons.  How do you compare strings
case-insensitively in Ada?  By writing a routine like StrIEqual, in
which case you lose the notational ease of '='.

Paul

Delphi Strings (was Re: Desirability of C++)

[Ray Blaak]

Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com> writes:
> > I think it was the ucsd-pascal people who first got it right.
> 
> They got some things right, and some things wrong.  For example, the
> limit of 255 characters is pretty annoying -- even in the bad old days
> of smaller memories.

For Delphi 4 and above, at least, strings by default are long strings, which
an have arbitrary length (up to 2GB). They are also automatically garbage
collected and shared using copy-on-write semantics.

The {$H+/-} switch controls whether or not the "String" type represents long
strings or short strings (i.e. max 255 chars).

I find that the need to use explicitly bounded strings in Delphi programs is
very very rare. Most of the time strings are just used to hold "a bunch of
text". For that purpose they work very well and are pretty efficient.

My only complaint is that one cannot derive distinct string types. Supposedly
in Delphi one can do things like:

  type Name = type String; // this should be a distinct type
  var
     n : Name;
     s : String;
  begin
     s := 'hi there';
     n := s; // I want a compile error here.
  end;

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
blaak@infomatch.com                            The Rhythm has my soul.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 830 bytes --]


Tarjei T. Jensen a �crit dans le message <8eonat$sqj3@ftp.kvaerner.com>...
>
>C has only one string type. It works reasonably well. Probably the most

Sorry but to me C has no string type. It has "char *" which is a pointer to
some
memory space! The consequence here is that there is no operator available !

Even to compare two strings you have to write:

   if (strcmp (name1, name2) == 0) {
      ...
   }

I do prefer:

   if name1 = name2 then
      ...
   end if;

Pascal.


--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[Marin D. Condic]

Jean-Pierre Rosen wrote:
> The difficult point is to what extent should libraries go to the standard.
> In 83, the line of the party was that there was no need to put libraries
> that could easily be written by the user; that was the reason for not having
> complex types, for example. In 95, it was recognized that this lead too
> often to people rewriting all the time the same modules with slightly
> different interfaces, and the borderline was moved to include more
> libraries - but certainly not all libraries that could be useful, or even
> desirable.
> 
I can understand the reasons for arguing that the standard should not
include libraries that are not "language" issues. Obviously the
hard-core end of the spectrum which wanted few/no libraries is no longer
in vogue with Ada95 specifying many new libraies. It would seem to me
that there might be some big advantages (for the language, at least, if
not for vendors) to letting the pendulum swing further in the other
direction. Why not specify even more libraries than are presently
available so long as they are optional annexes?

I don't think that machine dependent stuff should be included since that
is a moving target. But, for example, what would be wrong with making
some specs for various data structures, math domains, etc., where the
standard is not requiring implementation - just defining a complying
interface. This would make the language more useful and perhaps broaden
its appeal.

Standards clearly work against the vendor's immediate interests because
they narrow the ability to create product distinction and can create
extra work for little perceived return. However, if they expand the
market in general, everybody gets a bigger piece of the pie.
-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1993 bytes --]


Marin D. Condic <mcondic-nospam@quadruscorp.com> a �crit dans le message :
39103CBE.7D5B9F4E@quadruscorp.com...
> Jean-Pierre Rosen wrote:
> > The difficult point is to what extent should libraries go to the
standard.
> > In 83, the line of the party was that there was no need to put libraries
> > that could easily be written by the user; that was the reason for not
having
> > complex types, for example. In 95, it was recognized that this lead too
> > often to people rewriting all the time the same modules with slightly
> > different interfaces, and the borderline was moved to include more
> > libraries - but certainly not all libraries that could be useful, or
even
> > desirable.
> >
> I can understand the reasons for arguing that the standard should not
> include libraries that are not "language" issues. Obviously the
> hard-core end of the spectrum which wanted few/no libraries is no longer
> in vogue with Ada95 specifying many new libraies. It would seem to me
> that there might be some big advantages (for the language, at least, if
> not for vendors) to letting the pendulum swing further in the other
> direction. Why not specify even more libraries than are presently
> available so long as they are optional annexes?
>
Here in the Ada world, we tend to think that nothing is "standard",
sometimes not even usable, before it has been rubber-stamped by ISO.
A LOT of useful stuff in other languages is pretty "standard" without having
ever been endorsed by any official body. Yes, making libraries widely
available is a good thing, but waiting for ISO to endorse it would be much
too long a process. Put the good stuff on the web, let everybody use it, and
call it a "de facto" standard. If you can persuade your Ada vendor to
provide the libraries in its standard distribution, it's even better.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog

Re: Desirability of C++

[Jean-Pierre Rosen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1638 bytes --]


Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com> a �crit dans le message :
wcc66svllos.fsf@world.std.com...
> "Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen.adalog@wanadoo.fr> writes:
>
> > In this example, the question is whether this very simple functionnality
was
> > worth presenting a fourth variation of strings.
>
> Well, it wouldn't have been a *fourth* one.  If we had chosen to do it
> your way, it would have been *instead* of the bounded strings package we
> ended up with.  Therefore, it would not have added complexity.  The
> issue was purely whether assignment should fail at run time (as in your
> version) versus prevented at compile time (the RM version) -- that
> issue, traded off against the extra annoyance of having to instantiate
> the thing all over the place.
>
Once again, bounded strings are great when they are used as a
*representation* of some higher level concept. If you instantiate it for the
Last_Name of your client data base, you don't want to be able to assign a
Last_Name to a Street_Address. Analyses of the problem is required to define
what is the proper length for Last_Name, and all Last_Name should have the
same maximum length.

The issue is different if you see strings as -say- an input buffer. In that
case, regular strings, or perhaps Unbounded_Strings, might be more fit.
Actually, I don't use my Variable_String that much, except in one case: when
playing with annex E, because they fit the remote_types profile, and
Unbounded_Strings don't.

--
---------------------------------------------------------
           J-P. Rosen (Rosen.Adalog@wanadoo.fr)
Visit Adalog's web site at http://pro.wanadoo.fr/adalog

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 993 bytes --]


Paul Graham a �crit dans le message <391060A6.7ABCDCFE@cadence.com>...
>Pascal Obry wrote:
>> Even to compare two strings you have to write:
>>    if (strcmp (name1, name2) == 0) {
>>       ...
>> I do prefer:
>>    if name1 = name2 then
>>       ...
>
>Just because the standard library provides a somewhat unreadable
>function like strcmp doesn't mean you have to use it directly.  In C you


That was not my point. The problem is not the name, the problem is that
C does not have a string type so there is no operator on them =, <, >, :=
and no attribute 'Length, 'Last, 'First...

So, we can't even compare strings in Ada and C!

Pascal.

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2116 bytes --]

"Pascal Obry" <p.obry@wanadoo.fr> writes:

> Tarjei T. Jensen a �crit dans le message <8eonat$sqj3@ftp.kvaerner.com>...
> >
> >C has only one string type. It works reasonably well. Probably the most
> 
> Sorry but to me C has no string type. It has "char *" which is a pointer to
> some
> memory space! The consequence here is that there is no operator available !
> 

It's a pointer to an *array* of characters. Or a string could *be* an
array of charcters. Sounds familiar? The difference is that the C
standard library assumes that strings are null-terminated.

> Even to compare two strings you have to write:
> 
>    if (strcmp (name1, name2) == 0) {
>       ...
>    }
> 
> I do prefer:
> 
>    if name1 = name2 then
>       ...
>    end if;
> 
> Pascal.
> 

If you are complaining about the need to test against 0, the reason is
here:

strcmp(), strncmp()
     The strcmp() function  compares  two  strings  byte-by-byte,
     according  to  the ordering of your machine's character set.
     The function returns an integer greater than, equal  to,  or
     less  than  0,  if   the  string pointed to by s1 is greater
     than, equal to, or less than the string  pointed  to  by  s2
     respectively.  The sign of a non-zero return value is deter-
     mined  by the sign of the difference between the  values  of
     the  first  pair  of  bytes that differ in the strings being
     compared.  The strncmp() function makes the same  comparison
     but  looks  at  a maximum of n bytes. Bytes following a null
     byte are not compared.

I agree that a comparison operator looks nicer, but in practice it
does not really matter. I find that the C string library functions are
fairly complete, and works well.

> 
> --|------------------------------------------------------
> --| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
> --| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
> --|------------------------------------------------------
> --|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
> --|
> --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
> 
> 
> 

-- 
E pluribus Unix

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1420 bytes --]

"Pascal Obry" <p.obry@wanadoo.fr> writes:

> Paul Graham a �crit dans le message <391060A6.7ABCDCFE@cadence.com>...
> >Pascal Obry wrote:
> >> Even to compare two strings you have to write:
> >>    if (strcmp (name1, name2) == 0) {
> >>       ...
> >> I do prefer:
> >>    if name1 = name2 then
> >>       ...
> >
> >Just because the standard library provides a somewhat unreadable
> >function like strcmp doesn't mean you have to use it directly.  In C you
> 
> 
> That was not my point. The problem is not the name, the problem is that
> C does not have a string type so there is no operator on them =, <, >, :=
> and no attribute 'Length, 'Last, 'First...

This seems incredibly narrow-minded. Why is the notation so important
to you if the same functionality is available?

strcmp implements =, <, >
strcpy implements :=
strlen implements 'length
and as all arrays in C start with index 0, there is no need for
'first, and 'last is also given by strlen.

> 
> So, we can't even compare strings in Ada and C!
> 
> Pascal.
> 
> --|------------------------------------------------------
> --| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
> --| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
> --|------------------------------------------------------
> --|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
> --|
> --| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
E pluribus Unix

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen]

randhol+nospam@pvv.org (Preben Randhol) writes:

> On Thu, 04 May 2000 11:42:34 GMT, Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen wrote:
> >This seems incredibly narrow-minded. Why is the notation so important
> >to you if the same functionality is available?
> 
> The biggest problem is buffer overflow. That is as I know the most
> common security hole in Unix software.
> 
> -- 
> Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- <http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/>
>          "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling."
>                                                       -- Athol Fugard

Yes, that's a problem. It is also a problem with C arrays in
general. But it has nothing to do with notation, or whether C has a
string type or not, but with bounds checking.

C: 
     You shoot yourself in the foot. 

C++: 
     You accidently create a dozen instances of yourself and shoot
     them all in the foot. Providing emergency medical care is
     impossible since you can't tell which are bitwise copies and
     which are just pointing at others and saying, "that's me, over
     there."  

Ada: 
     After correctly packaging your foot, you attempt to concurrently
     load the gun, pull the trigger, scream and shoot yourself in the
     foot. When you try, however, you discover that your foot is of
     the wrong type. 

-- 
E pluribus Unix

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert I. Eachus]

"Marin D. Condic" wrote:
 
> I can understand the reasons for arguing that the standard should not
> include libraries that are not "language" issues. Obviously the
> hard-core end of the spectrum which wanted few/no libraries is no longer
> in vogue with Ada95 specifying many new libraries. It would seem to me
> that there might be some big advantages (for the language, at least, if
> not for vendors) to letting the pendulum swing further in the other
> direction. Why not specify even more libraries than are presently
> available so long as they are optional annexes?

    In this sense the language standard is evolving, and someday there
will be a new Ada standard which almost certainly will contain
additional "standard" packages, even if there is little or no change in
the base language.  What many people do not understand about the
standards process is that a formal standard is expected to be the
codification of an emerging consensus.  Ada has not been an execption to
this rule--anyone can propose a new standard "de novo", but for the
standard to be approved, there needs to be a defined community
representing several different constituencies which feels that a
standard in this area is required, and a consensus needs to be developed
within the community on a particular standard.

    There are two reasons why some useful packages were not in Ada 83. 
There was an intentional bias toward excluding interfaces that did not
require "magic" from the compiler, but there were several areas such as
complex types and numerics where this bias did not apply.  Why weren't
they included then?  Well look at the work of the NUMWG and later NRG. 
It took about a decade to define those packages well enough to
standardize them.  In the process, the NUMWG did a great deal of
research and development in the area of algorithms.  Similar work was
done by the IEEE in developing the IEEE floating point standards.  There
was a community, it recognized the need, but it took a lot of work to
reach a point where a standard was appropriate.  So it seems a little
silly to condemn Ada 83 for not including standards in these areas,
when, especially in the area of error bounds on trig functions, Ada 83
was the driving force behind the work.  (And the work did result in
several standards.  Ada 95 incorporated this work into the RM, and the
various additonal numerics standards were allowed to lapse.

    The same thing applies now in the area of class libraries.  It would
have been nice to release Ada 95 with a standard class library, but a
number of fundamental descisions in implementing such a library depend
on details of the language that were not determined until late in the
standardization process.  I think the line was drawn at a very practical
point.  All of the Annexes that made it into Ada 95 were ready for
standardization when the language was, although one of MY major concerns
was that the number of Annexes would spread potential reviewers way too
thin, and some of the Annexes would not receive the necessary amount of
attention.  In fact, some boners did slip through--look at G 1.1(55)
which gets complex exponmentiation wrong--fortunately in an
implementation permission.  But in the end, the Ada 95 RM was a much
higher quality document than the Ada 83 RM, and the Ada 83 RM was very
good for a programming language standard.

    So if you want a set of class libraries for Ada, work on one of the
existing libraries out there, write your own, or help to decide between
different approach so that there is an emerging consensus.  If there is
a need and a consensus, then a standard can be initiated, whether as
part of the next revision of Ada, or as a separate effort.  I just
happen to think that we are in the very early stages of that process
with respect to Ada class libraries.  (Bindings to class libraries in
other languages is a very different animal, and one that I personally
don't find interesting.)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert I. Eachus]

Robert A Duff wrote:
  
> I don't see why.  It makes perfect sense to assign a max-5 string into a
> max-10 string, and it can't fail at run time.  I could understand
> wanting to reject assignments from max-10 to max-5, because otherwise
> that might fail at run time.

  Because there is a conversion there, and it is unusual enough that I
don't want it to be an implicit conversion.  I may know that:

  Full_Name := First_Name & ' ' & Middle_Name & ' ' & Last_Name;

  is an assignment that will never fail, but I prefer to write
explicitly:

   Full_Name := To_Bounded_String(First_Name & ' ' &
                            Middle_Name & ' ' & Last_Name);

  what is so difficult about that?  Of course, if you are one of those
poor souls who has to live with restrictions on use clauses, don't blame
me.

    I said:
     
> >                If you really get upset about explicit conversions,
> > then instantiate Bounded_String once, with the maximum of all the
> > maximum sizes.
> 
> Then you waste memory on the strings that could have been small.
> If you think different max sizes are useful at all, then surely
> you will want to make different choices in different cases.

   (Bob's words above seem to imply that I am in favor of something that
I am not, and my words imply that he is in favor of something that he is
not.  I don't think either of us is confused, but that this is a case
where informal English is inherently confusing--all uses of "you" above
are indefinite placeholders, not the second person pronoun.)

   I don't "waste" memory on such things, although I don't really worry
about such a detail as a waste in any case.  There are cases in
databases where fields will be stored uncompressed, but in general
inserting "blank space" in data records will not increase the size of a
file due to compression.    I personally prefer to use different
instances of Bounded_String for different types of data, even when the
max sizes are the same.  I like the diagnostics I get.

> Surely you don't mean "cannot".  If you write 16 instantiations of
> Ada.Strings.Bounded in your program, you will get 16 copies of the code,
> on most compilers.  Perhaps you mean that a clever compiler could share
> the code?

  If the compiler you use does not pay attention to the possibility of
multiple instances of Ada.Strings.Bounded in a program, then yes you
could get code bloat when you compile thirty different packages
containing instances of Ada.Strings.Bounded, whether or not they are the
same size.  But if this is broken in your implementation, then this is a
minor issue compared to multiple instances of the generics in Text_IO.

  However, in reality, no implementation of Ada.Strings.Bounded should
generate ANY code.  There are interfaces which should map to calls to
non-generic library routines, and there are interfaces which are to
routines that should result in little or no code.  So, as far as I am
concerned, every subroutine in Ada.Strings.Bounded should have a pragma
Inline in the private part.
  
> One.  But it's not terribly useful, being inside a recursive function
> where I can't get at it.

     Okay, so you are saying that compiler writers will correctly do
generic instantiation at run-time when they must do it at run-time, but
otherwise they will bloat the code?  If you are using a compiler that is
that brain dead, just put all your instantiations inside the main
program, with parameters that cannot be evaluated until run-time.  But I
find this very hard to believe.  An instantiation of Ada.Strings.Bounded
must create an object, which may be required to be on the stack.  That
object may contain a code pointer, but the code can't go on the stack in
most architectures.  If that is the only possible way to implement some
instantiations, why would a compiler choose to go to a lot of extra
effort to handle some other cases wrong?  (As I said, I can imagine a
compiler that won't recogize the existance of several instantiations of
Ada.Stings.Fixed in different compilations and will create different
code modules, but not recognizing multiple instances in the same
compilation is just dumb.  What does gnat do here?  (Seems to me that
gnat should trivially detect identical generic instances which are
library units, but may not do code sharing for nested instances in
different compilations.)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Preben Randhol]

On Thu, 04 May 2000 11:42:34 GMT, Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen wrote:
>This seems incredibly narrow-minded. Why is the notation so important
>to you if the same functionality is available?

The biggest problem is buffer overflow. That is as I know the most
common security hole in Unix software.

-- 
Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- <http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/>
         "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling."
                                                      -- Athol Fugard

Re: Desirability of C++

[Preben Randhol]

On Thu, 04 May 2000 12:23:13 GMT, Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen wrote:
>
>Yes, that's a problem. It is also a problem with C arrays in
>general. But it has nothing to do with notation, or whether C has a
>string type or not, but with bounds checking.

No but it has to do with functionality.

-- 
Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- <http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/>
         "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling."
                                                      -- Athol Fugard

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --]


Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen a �crit dans le message ...
>This seems incredibly narrow-minded. Why is the notation so important
>to you if the same functionality is available?
>
>strcmp implements =, <, >
>strcpy implements :=
>strlen implements 'length
>and as all arrays in C start with index 0, there is no need for
>'first, and 'last is also given by strlen.

Thanks for the list :)

First I think that the notation is important for readability/maintenance.
Something
that looks stange in a "just good enough" software world :)

Now again my point was not about _naming_ or _notation_ but about level
of abstraction. In Ada string is a first class citizen and this is not true
in
C. Sure with the "C strings" you can do whatever is done with Ada strings.

Let me try again.

The point is that because in C there is no string you can't have operators
on them.
To have operators you need to have an object/type.

The level of abstraction for C strings is the one of pointers. On a "char *"
you
have indexing with "[ ]", reference with '*', and pointer operators like
'+',  '-', "++"
and "--". All others features are provided via library functions.

My point stop here. Nothing more.

Now do not ask me what level of abstraction I do prefer :)

Pascal.

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

Paul Graham:

> [...] You can also write:
> 
>     if (StrIEqual(name1, name2)) {
>         ...

> for case-insensitive comparisons.  How do you compare strings
> case-insensitively in Ada?  By writing a routine like StrIEqual, in
> which case you lose the notational ease of '='.

In a non time-critical part, you can use the following solution:

  if To_upper(name1) = To_upper(name2) then ...

- To_upper from Ada.Characters_handling (+/- correct spelled)

_____________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/

Re: Desirability of C++

[Marin D. Condic]

Robert I. Eachus wrote:
>     So if you want a set of class libraries for Ada, work on one of the
> existing libraries out there, write your own, or help to decide between
> different approach so that there is an emerging consensus.  If there is
> a need and a consensus, then a standard can be initiated, whether as
> part of the next revision of Ada, or as a separate effort.  I just
> happen to think that we are in the very early stages of that process
> with respect to Ada class libraries.  (Bindings to class libraries in
> other languages is a very different animal, and one that I personally
> don't find interesting.)

Perhaps you missed my intention. I understand that the process is
evolutionary and it takes lots of work to get something accepted as a
standard. My point was to suggest that if there is to be a revision to
Ada down the line, the mindset might be to deliberately search for
libraries that might make good (if not perfect) additions as annexes.
(Such as a statistics library? :-)

Some people might be reluctant to extend the language in this way. I
understand their point. Others (such as myself) might lean more in the
other direction because of a belief that it would make the language more
useful to have some standardized interfaces for various libraries
defined. Maybe it doesn't need to start as an ISO standard, but it might
eventually make its way there. Of course we attempted to do this in the
recent past and the thing fell apart - probably because there were too
many people involved to get a consensus going on what sorts of things
should be in the libraries. Now if two or three folks got together and
did the work, with a committee simply reviewing the end result, then
something might get done. Maybe not perfectly, but perhaps Good Enough.

MDC
-- 
======================================================================
Marin David Condic - Quadrus Corporation - http://www.quadruscorp.com/
Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ q u a d r u s c o r p . c o m
Visit my web site at:  http://www.mcondic.com/

"I'd trade it all for just a little more"
    --  Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10]
======================================================================

Re: Desirability of C++

[ANTHONY GAIR]

It could be said that the C++ standard died very quickly indeed
Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
www.remotely.useful.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[ANTHONY GAIR]

which one is that then ?
Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
www.remotely.useful.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[ANTHONY GAIR]

its always been easier to hire unskilled staff ..... whats your point 

(in a friendly ribbing sort of way)
Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
www.remotely.useful.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[Robert Dewar]

In article <20000507071636.16841.00001779@ng-fz1.aol.com>,
  anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) wrote:
>
> It could be said that the C++ standard died very quickly
indeed


Well anything could be said, but this claim is of course
ludicrous. C++ is alive and well and extensively used,
not as extensively as the really popular languages like
Visual Basic and COBOL, but C++ has a big and significant
slice of the market.

I have the horrible feeling that Anthony is coming from the
fantasy world where everyone is now programming in Java (I
must admit that several members of the faculty at NYU are
under the same illusion). Amazing how hype can vanquish
facts so easily in our field

Robert Dewar


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Hyman Rosen]

anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) writes:
> It could be said that the C++ standard died very quickly indeed

But that would be wrong, as the C++ Standard is actually alive and well.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <20000507071636.16841.00001779@ng-fz1.aol.com>,
	anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) wrote:

>
>It could be said that the C++ standard died very quickly indeed
>Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
>www.remotely.useful.com

Wishful thinking, I suppose.  C++ is not dead.  Java is not dead. Ada is 
dead.  Even COBOL and Fortran are not dead.  I just got off the phone with
yet another program manager who I found unpersuaded by the technological
benefits of Ada for his project.  

"Even if Ada is better, it is easier for me to hire C++ programmers."  He is
convinced that Ada cannot be so much better that it is worth the risk and 
hassle of recruiting Ada programmers.  He has his pick of graduates who already
know C++.  Why should he bother looking around for Ada programmers?

As bad as C++ is, and I consider it pretty bad, the question of Ada is still
one that has little to do with its benefits and everything to do with its
popularity.  

A famous Rabbi is quoted as having said, "For those who believe in God, no proof
is necessary.  For those who do not, none is possible."   People will make their
choices based on reasons that have nothing to do with what is best or better.  They
will first make the choice and then create a carefully considered set of reasons 
to justify it.  

Richard Riehle
richard@adaworks.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[Larry Kilgallen]

In article <Pine.A41.3.96-heb-2.07.1000508142856.86526B-100000@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il>, Ehud Lamm <mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il> writes:
> Consider this. Ada is not case sensitive, but we are, insisting on Ada vs.
> ADA.

Consider this:  English is case-sensitive.  ADA means the Americans
for Democratic Action, the Americans with Disability Act, or the
American Dental Association, whereas Ada means a computer programing
language, a town in the US Midwest, or various individual women.

Somebody else can come up with the meanings from other countries.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Stanley R. Allen]

Richard D Riehle wrote:
> 
> Wishful thinking, I suppose.  C++ is not dead.  Java is not dead. Ada is
> dead.  Even COBOL and Fortran are not dead.  

Missing "not" at the end of line one?  Or an outpouring of despair?

-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[Mario Klebsch]

Richard D Riehle <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> writes:
>"Even if Ada is better, it is easier for me to hire C++ programmers."  He is
>convinced that Ada cannot be so much better that it is worth the risk and 
>hassle of recruiting Ada programmers.  He has his pick of graduates who already
>know C++.  Why should he bother looking around for Ada programmers?

Perhaps someone should introduce ADA the his team of C++ programmers
and let them decide. They probably are biased towards C++, but I am
convinced, even C++ programmers can think and see the value of the
language.

73, Mario
-- 
Mario Klebsch						mario@klebsch.de

Re: Desirability of C++

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Mario Klebsch wrote:

> Perhaps someone should introduce ADA
> to his team of C++ programmers and let them decide.
> They probably are biased towards C++
> but I am convinced that
> even C++ programmers can think and see the value of [Ada].

I'm sure that C++ programmers can see
or at least ought to be able to see the value of Ada.
But the value of Ada is irrelevant.
But the fact is that Ada occupies a tiny niche.
Most programmers consider Ada to be
a special purpose programming language
designed for "mission critical" systems.
It is still hard to get really good optimizing Ada compilers
and most programmers would rather invest time and effort
in a language like C++
because they can get jobs as C++ programmers.

I don't think that you are going to get
many C++ programmers to switch to Ada.
I think that we would be better off
to re-derive Ada from C++.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Gautier]

"E. Robert Tisdale" wrote:

> It is still hard to get really good optimizing Ada compilers

Are you sure ? You said the same exactly 1 week ago.

* What about DEC Ada ? It has very smart and aggressive optimisations
that make use of Ada features - subtyping, strong typing, precise
definition of arrays, and so on.

* What about GNAT ? The code generator has been used for successful
video games (Quake not to name it...). With the suppress_all (-gnatp),
cross-unit inlining (-gnatn), -O2 options, it rocks! And
GNAT 3.13p should have Ada-specific optimisations around array
indexing, aggregates, slices. Prior to that, I invite you
to test my small full-Ada 3D engine, compiled with 3.10p. Link below.
300 frames per second on a 450Mhz machine (~25 needed for smooth animation)!

> I don't think that you are going to get
> many C++ programmers to switch to Ada.

I don't think, too.
 
> I think that we would be better off
> to re-derive Ada from C++.

It's not reasonable. Pure waste of time:

1) C++ is already complicated enough. Who really understand or uses its
features, at which extent ? IT people are conservative - for
good reasons. Wait first they use "C++" rather than "C*1.001"...

2) C/C++ is indeed itself a small niche in the *whole* IT world. Think
to business, finance, banking, insurances and so on.
With normal people who have calculations to do with some data.
What do they use ? Maybe still COBOL. But more and more: Visual Basic for
Applications. With procedures, functions, if..then..elsif..endif structured
blocks, strings concatenated with '&', exception parts.
Hey, what does it look like ?... So, what can be the "natural" ISO language
for doing things in a larger scale ? Long life to JEWL, CLAW, VAD,... !

____________________________________________________
Gautier  --  http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/e3d.htm

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 538 bytes --]


ANTHONY GAIR a �crit dans le message <20000507181225.23279.00001712@ng-
>Are ADA and linux a good combination :-


Just a side note, could you spell Ada this way (and not ADA) :)

Pascal.

--|------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                           Team-Ada Member
--| 45, rue Gabriel Peri - 78114 Magny Les Hameaux FRANCE
--|------------------------------------------------------
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--| "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[Ehud Lamm]

Consider this. Ada is not case sensitive, but we are, insisting on Ada vs.
ADA.

C is case sensitive, but they don't seem to care if you user a lowercase
c...

Ehud Lamm mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il
http://purl.oclc.org/NET/ehudlamm <== My home on the web 
Check it out and subscribe to the E-List- for interesting essays and more!

Re: Desirability of C++

[Hyman Rosen]

anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) writes:
> which one is that then ?

Are you asking which Standard? There is only one -

International Standard ISO/IEC 14882
Programming Languages -- C++

Reference number ISO/IEC 14882:1998(E)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Stanley R. Allen]

"E. Robert Tisdale" wrote:
>  
> I'm sure that C++ programmers can see
> or at least ought to be able to see the value of Ada.

What makes you so sure?  The hacker mentality is everywhere
in the computer field (including among developers using Ada)
but it seems to be most prevelant among C and C++ programmers
because the culture of those languages encourages that mentality.

-- 
Stanley Allen
mailto:Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard D Riehle]

In article <3916FEC4.90721B0D@raytheon.com>,
	"Stanley R. Allen" <Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com> wrote:

>Richard D Riehle wrote:
>> 
>> Wishful thinking, I suppose.  C++ is not dead.  Java is not dead. Ada is
>> dead.  Even COBOL and Fortran are not dead.  
>
>Missing "not" at the end of line one?  Or an outpouring of despair?

Sorry, Stanley.  There was indeed a missing "not," my despair nothwithstanding.

Richard Riehle
 

Re: Desirability of C++

[Pascal Obry]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1227 bytes --]


Hyman Rosen <hymie@prolifics.com> a �crit dans le message :
t7u2g8ai1g.fsf@calumny.jyacc.com...
> anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) writes:
> > which one is that then ?
>
> Are you asking which Standard? There is only one -
>

I think that he was using standard as used in the C++ world. That is the "de
facto"
standard. I would say that in this case it could be the Microsoft C++
standard :)

Do not search this is not an ISO standard.

Pascal.

--

--|------------------------------------------------------------
--| Pascal Obry                               Team-Ada Member |
--|                                                           |
--| EDF-DER-IPN-SID- T T I                                    |
--|                       Intranet: http://cln46gb            |
--| Bureau N-023            e-mail: p.obry@der.edf.fr         |
--| 1 Av G�n�ral de Gaulle  voice : +33-1-47.65.50.91         |
--| 92141 Clamart CEDEX     fax   : +33-1-47.65.50.07         |
--| FRANCE                                                    |
--|------------------------------------------------------------
--|
--|         http://perso.wanadoo.fr/pascal.obry
--|
--|   "The best way to travel is by means of imagination"

Re: Desirability of C++

[Alfred Hilscher]

"Stanley R. Allen" wrote:
> 
> "E. Robert Tisdale" wrote:
> >
> > I'm sure that C++ programmers can see
> > or at least ought to be able to see the value of Ada.
> 
> What makes you so sure?  

Maybe some "C++ programmers" use only C++ because they are forced to do
so :-)

Re: Desirability of C++

[Mario Klebsch]

"Stanley R. Allen" <Stanley_R_Allen-NR@raytheon.com> writes:

>"E. Robert Tisdale" wrote:
>>  
>> I'm sure that C++ programmers can see
>> or at least ought to be able to see the value of Ada.

>What makes you so sure?

Even I was able to see it. :-)

73, Mario
-- 
Mario Klebsch						mario@klebsch.de

Re: Desirability of C++

[wv12]

It's a weird combo.
  anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR)
wrote:
> which one is that then ?
> Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
> www.remotely.useful.com
>



Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Frank J. Lhota]

<wv12@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8fdhd0$r8$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> It's a weird combo.
>   anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR)
> wrote:
> > which one is that then ?
> > Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
> > www.remotely.useful.com
> >

Why are Ada and Linux a weird combo? Both Linux and GNAT are open source,
and based on GNU technology.

Re: Desirability of C++

[Warner Bruns]

 Linux is too broad.
 As far as I know, there does NOT exist an Ada compiler for
 Linux on an Alpha processor.
 I hope to get corrected.
 I was stopping using Ada for my computations,
 since I was unable to locate an Ada compiler for Linux on Alpha
 and on other platforms (notably multi-processor systems).

 Warner

In article <o4zS4.15$8j4.496@client>, "Frank J. Lhota"
<NOSPAM.Frank.Lhota@lexma.meitech.com> writes:
> <wv12@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8fdhd0$r8$1@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > It's a weird combo.
> >   anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR)
> > wrote:
> > > which one is that then ?
> > > Are ADA and linux a good combination :-
> > > www.remotely.useful.com
> > >
> 
> Why are Ada and Linux a weird combo? Both Linux and GNAT are open source,
> and based on GNU technology.
> 
> 

Re: Desirability of C++

[ANTHONY GAIR]

All you need to do, is to compile the GNAT source on your alpha
installation....
good luck
**********************************************

Are ADA and linux a good combination ?:-
visit www.remotely.useful.com - under construction

Re: Desirability of C++

[Warner Bruns]

In article <20000518061413.06047.00000001@ng-ck1.aol.com>,
anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) writes:
> 
> All you need to do, is to compile the GNAT source on your alpha
> installation....
> good luck
> **********************************************
> 
> Are ADA and linux a good combination ?:-
> visit www.remotely.useful.com - under construction

 This doesn't work, since gnat needs gnat to be compiled.
 I did try to cross-compile on an alpha running tru64.
 But it doesn't work, since the bin-utils do not allow
 the combination to be run on an alpha-tru64 and compile for
 an alpha-linux.
    I also tried to install the gnat-binaries from tru64
 on linux-alpha. This also does not work, since the gnat executable
 produces assembler that the linux-assembler does not like.
 I really did spend some weekends to get a running gnat on
 linux-Alpha.

   So: Ada and Linux are not a good combination on the
 Alpha platform.

 Warner

Re: Desirability of C++

[ANTHONY GAIR]

Sorry for my presumption, thats a bit of a hassle with the alpha eh...

have you tried the linux ada site ?

http://www.gnuada.org/alt.html

those guys might know something ....
**********************************************

Are ADA and linux a good combination ?:-
visit www.remotely.useful.com - under construction

Re: Desirability of C++

[Richard Kenner]

In article <8g15c0$dpc$1@mamenchi.zrz.TU-Berlin.DE> bruns@tetibm2.ee.TU-Berlin.DE (Warner Bruns) writes:
> I did try to cross-compile on an alpha running tru64.
> But it doesn't work, since the bin-utils do not allow
> the combination to be run on an alpha-tru64 and compile for
> an alpha-linux.

You actually don't need to do this.  You can go up to the .s files
in the cross-environment (see the gnat-cross target) and then do the
assemblies on the target.

>   So: Ada and Linux are not a good combination on the Alpha platform.

A faculty member at NYU (not part of the GNAT project) built GNAT for
Alpha/Linux using the above method back around 1994; it's not that hard.