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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a1ce307c10055549 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-12-08 09:18:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: nma124@hotmail.com (steve_H) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: IBM Acquires Rational Ada Date: 8 Dec 2002 09:18:02 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <8db3d6c8.0212080918.4e0a732@posting.google.com> References: <3DF1615C.7AAAC86E@adaworks.com> <3DF1B042.6603DDDE@easystreet.com> <3DF2A483.EC512CDF@adaworks.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.203.198.30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1039367882 7756 127.0.0.1 (8 Dec 2002 17:18:02 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 8 Dec 2002 17:18:02 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:31553 Date: 2002-12-08T17:18:02+00:00 List-Id: Richard Riehle wrote in message news:<3DF2A483.EC512CDF@adaworks.com>... > > Alas, no hint of what will become of Rational Ada. If anyone at IBM > realizes the power of the Rational Ada product, it could be great for > Ada and for IBM. I wish I could be optimistic about this. > > Richard Riehle I have not used rational Ada products. But from the point of view of making Ada more popular with the masses, I doubt it will make any difference if Rational Ada compiler existed or not. Why do you think rational Ada is important for Ada? The only hope for Ada getting more popular, is for gnat to be fully integrated in the gcc system. This makes Ada available anywhere gcc is available. This means a programmer now can write in Ada (instead of C or C++) knowing their software can be build just as easily. All those commerical compiler systems are dying (those for standard languages that gcc can now fully do, mainly C and C++). From Sun to IBM to HP to Borland's. As gcc improves, commerical systems that costs thousands and tangled with licensing issues are being left behind. Those companies now need to add more value to their compilers than just compiling the source code, and this comes in the form of better debuggers, and such. If it were not for gcc, we probably would not have linux nor apache nor 99.99% of the open system products out there. If gcc could do Ada long time ago, then may be apache would have been written in Ada instead of C? at least that would have been an option. just my 2 cents ofcourse.