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,fedc2d05e82c9174 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com Subject: Re: Ada 83 - Sometimes still chosen Date: 1999/03/26 Message-ID: <7dfqr1$g5j$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 459294768 References: <87aex3pue4.fsf@mihalis.ix.netcom.com> <36F913E0.75F51763@lmco.com> <7dbcj3$e0l@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com> <7dbvl2$5bl$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <7dc9ld$2u6@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x13.dejanews.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Mar 26 11:25:29 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-03-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <7dc9ld$2u6@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>, Richard D Riehle wrote: > In article <7dbvl2$5bl$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, > robert_dewar@my-dejanews.com wrote: > I am uneasy with the selection of the word "obsolete." > A technology is obsolete if it is not the best choice > for the solution to a particular problem. I disagree, I would say that sometimes the use of obsolete equipment is the right solution. I just bought a 1987 Ford F250 truck, definitely an obsolete piece of equipment, but just fine for my purposes. > I return to the example of the 1750A. This processor, > by all standards for earth-bound computing is obsolete. > For a variety of technical reasons, it is still the > optimal choice for many space applications. Actually we see very few projects selecting the 1750A for new projects. There are other alternatives these days, such as the ERC. > Sometimes the economics of an 8086 can make it the > correct choice. Very rarely these days. A 68K is almost always the better choice, and is far more often used, which is why there are Ada 95 compilers available for the 68K. These days, it is quite inexpensive to generate a new Ada 95 compiler, and if there are systems for which Ada 95 is not used, it is an indicator that very few new projects are choosing the hardware in question (yes, I realize that there is a chicken and egg problem, but it is minimal given the low cost of porting an Ada 95 compiler). If no Ada 95 compiler is available for a given system, it almost certainly means that the customer demand for such a compiler is minimal or non-existant. My fundamental point here is that the general impression of the community is that Ada 83 was a failure. Yes, that is hyperobole of course, but on the other hand, at this stage, Ada 83 is pretty creaky. Just yesterday, I talked to someone doing research into object oriented component design. He was trying to fit into C++, and having various troubles. He made a list of deficiencies of C++, all fixed in Ada 95. He then was playing with a modified Java to accomodate his ideas, all of which could have been used directly in Ada 95. When I asked him about Ada, he replied "Oh, does Ada have object oriented features, I didn't know that". Now suppose he were to ask on this list if Ada has object oriented features. I would far rather he get an unambiguous yes, rather than a: "well it depends which version of Ada you are using" type response, which could easily be interpreted to mean "not really". The number of people asking about Ada 83 on this list is small. The number of people asking about Ada 83 on this list who do not know that they are asking about Ada 83 and thus do not say is even smaller. So of the people asking questions about Ada (without specifying which version), the overwhelming majority are talking about Ada 95, and it is a definite disservice to tell people that Ada 83 is still in wide use and that they must worry about the Ada 83 answer as well as the Ada 95 answer. This would be like asking a question on the C++ group, and having responders worry that you might really be asking about C! -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own