From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-07 17:06:28 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!194.168.222.61.MISMATCH!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: chris User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5b) Gecko/20030903 Thunderbird/0.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <7KP6b.3609$1%2.67378@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net> Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:10:20 +0200 NNTP-Posting-Host: 81.98.236.164 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net 1062979587 81.98.236.164 (Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:06:27 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 01:06:27 BST Organization: ntl Cablemodem News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42253 Date: 2003-09-08T01:10:20+02:00 List-Id: Christopher Browne wrote: > Actually, C# _isn't_ so constrained. There are about three > implementations for other platforms; the most mature being MONO. > > I have run sample C# programs, at least, on Linux. Cool. I was aware of Mono, but thought it was not in a usable state yet. Hmm, A# on Mono and .NET? Now that would be good. > That's a far cry from either: > - MONO being a total replacement for .NET; > - C# becoming a popular software implementation language on Linux > or *BSD. That's a shame. As much as I dislike the evil empire, .Net helps solve a difficult problem and it is *not* migration to 64 bit. It allows sw written in different languages to combine effectively. That opens up a lot of code to languages. Ada suffers from a lack of libraries for many things, and it is not alone. .Net offers an abundance of such things. That is what's good about .Net! The bad part is it seems M$ are intent on vendor lock in and .Net is the vehicle through which they seek to attain it! > Mind you, _none_ of that is useful in arguing for the impending > disappearance of C. > > What _would_ be useful arguments would be: > > - That OS kernels were being implemented in C#. > > Note that neither C#, Java, nor even C++ are heavily used in that > regard. C is still pretty much "king." C++ OS development is hampered by RTTI. Many people posting alt.os.development who want to do development with C++ have to turn RTTI off and work around it. If that proves too difficult, some drop to C. I think Ada 95 would be an excellent tool for an OS and wanted to do one in it, still do infact, but an OS is not a trivial application. > - That vital libraries were being implemented in [something other > than C]. > > "Don't use C; In my opinion, C is a library programming language not > an app programming language." -- Owen Taylor (GTK+ and ORBit > developer) I disagree with that... just don't use C! :) Seriously, it has some merit but I'd rather not if given the choice. What I want is a language like Ada 95 without the clunky bits because of its' evolution. Something that has all the good things, but is simpler and wiser. Chris