Re: Weakness of Ada is expensive / security / etc. ? Anything else?

[Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>]

* Paul Rubin:

> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
>>> Is that basically the FOSS segment of GNAT, with some support added?
>> Yes, as far as I can see, it's the same bits you get as part of Red
>> Hat Enterpise Linux (and CentOS is built from pretty much the same
>> sources).  It's based on the FSF version, so you get the GNAT run time
>> exception.
>
> Fair enough, though that level of support doesn't seem that useful
> (downloading FSF GNAT to my laptop and getting it working wasn't
> difficult).

Well, the subscription comes with developer support.  (The
self-support option is $99 per year, with the same packages as far as
I know.)

> I guess GPL SPARK is not included.

It's not.

>> Production support (after deployment) is separate, and Red Hat will
>> support deployment on Red Hat Enterprise Linux only, I assume.
>
> I wonder if anyone is using it for real.

That's a question for Red Hat sales.  I couldn't possibly comment.

>> So this is certainly not an option for small-device embedded
>> development, or high-assurance software.  But for those markets,
>> AdaCore's pricing is not unreasonable, I think.
>
> The number I heard was at least 10x higher than single-seat licenses of
> competing C/C++ and Forth products that I know of.

But these products have unbundled support, and you pay only for
software licenses, right?  So the comparison isn't really fair.  For
GNAT, the equivalent self-support option is priced at a very
competitive $0.

> I'm not exactly criticizing AdaCore since they're probably doing the
> right thing for their target market (aerospace companies, high-dollar
> critical systems, etc).  But it seems to leave an unfilled need for the
> low-budget embedded developer who wants a better language than C.

I doubt it's commercially reasonable to support such developers, at
least not without constraining them to a specific (small set) of
target platforms.