Re: Do we need "Mission-Critical" software? Was: What to Do?

[n_brunot@my-deja.com]

In article <93e33l$tfu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
  Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com> wrote:
> But there are many languages around, hundreds of them, and
> Ada is far MORE popular than many of them (what's the last
> time you saw a new project started in Jovial).

I read a couple a times the word 'jovial' and thought it was a joke :-)
I guess you could be ready to invent your own language, used only by
you, to make proof that there are languages less popular than Ada ...
Easy way to prove almost any absurd assertion :-)

> Counterproductive -- I don't think so, most Ada users starting
> new Ada projects today do so *precisely* because they think
> that Ada is technically superior for the task at hand.

And they are often right, but that has nothing to do with the question.
That's true for every language. You'll always find someone choosing the
most obscure language, and convinced that this is the right choice.
The great feeling of being an unrecognized precursor, I guess ...

> But despite hints to the contrary in N. Brunot's message, I
> don't think there is any magic method of making Ada successful.

There is no magic method.
Sorry to confirm you that's usually true for almost everything.
Java popularity certainly comes from Sun support.
But one thing Sun certainly knew how to do, because it's a successfull
commercial company, is how to promote the language to convince people to
use it
Ada promotion is too often the despising attitude of arrogant people
teaching to others how stupid they are.

Choose some Ada books and some Java ones.
Have them read by someone who is neither Ada or Java fanatics.
Ask him what he thinks, and not what you would like to hear.
The conclusion is straightforward.

That's what keep companies away from Ada, much more than the language
itself.
They'll find a lot of Java programmers in any location, while it's much
harder to find an Ada programmer.



Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/