Improving the first contact with Ada (was: GCC conflict on Ubuntu for mixed Ada/C++ project)

[Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org>]

zeta_no <olivier_henley@hotmail.com> writes:
[...]
> Note: I don't want to be unpleasant, but I have to criticized the Ada
> community for not being well organized.  I see a desire from the main
> actors to popularize Ada among developpers.  You just have to look at
> the videos, conferences and news from AdaCore that convey the idea
> that Ada is strong and far from dead.  I think there is really place
> for improvement, mostly on first contact with new developers to come.
> Compared to the C/C++ community, Ada really needs fresh blood and it
> is not with the kind of experience I went though on Linux that new
> people will get interested by Ada.  I tell you, lot of my schoolmates
> would not even have passed the Ubuntu problems and get back directly
> to C++ with absolutely no desire to maybe, one day, check back at Ada.

I have to commend you in return for your persistence and your
willingness to offer feedback.

> Nevertheless, I have to say that I find the integration on MS Windows
> very good.
>
> - First, one thing we can't argue.  Check on Distrowatch, Ubuntu is
> THE most popular distribution, by far.  I know a lot of serious
> programmer won't run on Ubuntu, but nevertheless, right after MS
> windows, the fresh blood is on Ubuntu, nowhere else.

That's OK, users of Ubuntu will get the Debian packages, which you said
were the way to go :) Of course they will always lag behind Debian
unstable.  Of course Ubuntu might introduce bugs that are not present in
Debian.  That's what people should expect when using a derivative rather
than the original; no surprises there.

OTOH, if your development team uses a mix of different operating
systems, GNAT GPL is definitely the way to go.

> - Second, these days, in every engineering schools we learn C++ and or
> Java.  So samples and methods involving mixing Ada with C++ and Java
> code should work flawlessly.

I agree but unfortunately, although I am an active member of the Ada
community, I don't have the manpower (or skills, or need for that
matter) to improve the situation myself.  Maybe you can contribute?
Writing a tutorial and reporting bugs precisely and formally
(e.g. http://bugs.debian.org/582219) would be a very good start.

> - Third, there is few, and a lot of bad tutorials around the web.
> Again, my schoolmates and I ALWAYS go by tutorials first.  It is
> easier, it gets the job done faster, gives an overview of the tool and
> helps figure out what can be done with it. (Check what the Python
> community achieved)

Which tutorials specifically did you use and which ones were bad?  How
would you suggest improving them?

Also, do you actually _learn_ anything in tutorials?  I mean, do you
learn the underlying concepts, the basic knowledge that empowers you, or
do you only skim the surface of things and remain dependent on "experts"
to guide you?

> - Finaly, I understand the community is small and maybe already makes
> its best to keep Ada alive but I think it is important to give you the
> feedback of a newbie, because, I am sure, most of the time, people
> like me just vanish without telling you why they have been put off by
> Ada.  It is not Ada the problem, it's the presentation of the
> technology which fails.

It is OK to vent your frustrations in a general way -- your frustrations
are, IMHO, legitimate -- but please understand that this does not help
"the Ada community" much.

> I hope all of this was constructive and I'll try to help others in
> time, when my knowledge of Ada will be sufficient.

It would be constructive if you could be more specific.  In particular I
would be very interested in ideas on how to improve the first contact a
newbie can have with Ada.

-- 
Ludovic Brenta.