From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,349657f8b72f2411 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mgk25@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) Subject: Re: Where's Ada95 when OO languages are discussed? Date: 1999/03/24 Message-ID: <7dbl0d$17$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 458672089 References: <7d8ik6$s6d$1@its.hooked.net> Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-03-24T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "Mike Silva" writes: |> I've noticed that Ada95 is conspicuously absent when OO languages are |> discussed on the net. One would get the impression that C++, Java, |> Smalltalk and Eiffel are the only big players. Any thoughts as to why this |> is? Ada programmers have often very different personalities than Java programmers. Ada programmers enjoy their language silently and write some of the world's most critical code in it. They know the quality of their programming environment and they do not need continued public reassurance from the trade press and the news group mob about their choice of tools. To Java programmers, it seems to be much more important to swim with the herd, to have the latest and greatest language, the language that every child knows thanks to the gigantic marketing departments behind it. Ada is a strongly typed language, Java is a strongly hyped language. Ada programmers do not need the assistence of marketing departments in the usability evaluation of programming environments. I have nothing against Java itself, it is indeed one of the nicer languages around, just like Ada95 and Eiffel. It just causes in me a slight aversion if something becomes a bit too popular, and this has happened with Java. Markus -- Markus G. Kuhn, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, UK Email: mkuhn at acm.org, WWW: