Re: Listing currently maintained libraries for Ada

[i3text@gmail.com]

On Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:37:59 PM UTC-7, Jeffrey Carter wrote:
> A mature library will be useful but see no 
> "maintenance activity" because there is no longer anything to change.

This is actually the first time I've seen someone take this position, so I've been thinking about when it might be true.

One the one hand, I agree that this list is unsatisfactory as a collection of all libraries that one might want to use. An old but well crafted library could still be valuable, especially if it covers something important and there is no alternative.

However, my "activity" criterion was chosen for two reasons. First, I take it as axiomatic that no software achieves perfection. If it is being used, people will report bugs and rough edges, prompting the developer to tweak things, even if it is just the documentation. Second, a large portion of libraries interact with other things that continue to evolve, so compatibility at one point doesn't imply compatibility forever.

I have not done embedded systems work, but I've heard that it is easier than doing desktop applications since you are developing for a restricted, stable environment. In the field of embedded systems, is it a common attitude that software *can* be developed to a point where it no longer needs any attention? I'm wondering how this might affect how Ada is received by application developers.