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-Thread: 103376,a0be06fbc0dd71f1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!news.tiscali.fr!club-internet.fr!feedme-small.clubint.net!feeder.news-service.com!feeder3.cambrium.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!not-for-mail From: Ludovic Brenta Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: The future of Ada is at risk References: <20071229040639.f753f982.coolzone@it.dk> Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 11:22:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87d4sg372q.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:lKhyYB6qlTlKJdZmzb+qcSq/7zo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Tele2 X-Trace: DXC=63lD>>V_JQe0>=4DdV@@6J;P=XBG>KKV6lFI;JM];B Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19205 Date: 2008-01-05T11:22:37+01:00 List-Id: Agyaras writes: >> The GNU GNAT Compiler is the only Open Source compiler, and >> it lacks proper support and implementation on a variety of platforms. > I can confirm this. E.g. it is a major headache to get the GNAT compiler > working under Mac OS X. AdaCore stopped distributing GNAT/GPS (GPL) for > the Mac. There has never been a GNAT/GPS package for Solaris AFAIK. > etc.etc. > > Ada and the Open Source community:- there are several problems. > > 1) Perception. Ada is still perceived as "the Pentagon language", > and is associated in many people's minds with "evil". This > perception is very difficult to change. Funny that TCP/IP was invented at DARPA where the D stands for Defence. Is TCP/IP widely considered evil? > 2) Complexity. Ada has been designed for large, complex, reliable > software systems. Most open source projects are smaller and it is > not worth the effort to use Ada: or would you use a tractor in your > garden behind your house? > 3) The quick-and-dirty mentality. This is very widespread in the > current IT world. Deadline pressure leads to q&d coding, hence the > popularity of dynamic script languages that promise rapid > results. Goes completely against the Ada philosophy. I agree. I think 2 and 3 are really one and the same. > 4) Ada limitations. Certain aspects of Ada are painfully clumsy. The > three string libs, unnecessary multitude of I/O libs, primitive > exception handling, constructors are not part of the language, > finalization is an afterthought,.... These can be explained with a simple philosophy: if you don't need some feature, then Ada does not force you to pay the price for it. That's why unbounded strings are not the same as simple or bounded strings; that's why finalization is optional. > 5) Lack of libraries and frameworks. This is due to the unpopularity > of the language. Ada needs at least a relational DB binding *that > works* with the current open-source RDBMS-es (as opposed to Gnade), > she needs a good scientific library, she needs simple but powerful > string handling, just to name a few. The catch-22 is that nobody > will develop these until there's strong demand for Ada-based s/w, > and there won't be strong demand until the libs are available. Luckily Ada also has a committed following that publishes open source libraries from time to time. I wish some of these libraries were integrated into future revisions of the standard. For example, I wish the algorithms from Charles were part of the language. -- Ludovic Brenta.