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: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-04-23 06:15:57 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: softeng3456@netscape.net (soft-eng) Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit addressing and OOP Date: 23 Apr 2003 06:15:57 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <9fa75d42.0304230515.48064263@posting.google.com> References: <9fa75d42.0302250710.5549baaf@posting.google.com> <3E5C7033.BD5DC462@adaworks.com> <9fa75d42.0302260618.7506cba7@posting.google.com> <3E5CF5C6.84822F57@adaworks.com> <8qkczsAcGcn+Ew83@nildram.co.uk> <3EA04A1E.CAFC1FEF@adaworks.com> <9fa75d42.0304221126.7112b7d5@posting.gOrganization: LJK Software NNTP-Posting-Host: 32.97.239.30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1051103757 980 127.0.0.1 (23 Apr 2003 13:15:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Apr 2003 13:15:57 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:62547 comp.object:61661 comp.lang.ada:36407 misc.misc:13600 Date: 2003-04-23T13:15:57+00:00 List-Id: Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen) wrote in message news:... > In article <9fa75d42.0304221126.7112b7d5@posting.google.com>, softeng3456@netscape.net (soft-eng) writes: > > > Also, Ada proponents made much of its strong > > typing. But it was not at all novel or revolutionary. > > It was a very common language idea > > at that time, and then-popular Pascal had it too. > > As a Pascal programmer I was thrilled to use Ada since the typing > system is so much stronger than in Pascal. > > > That wasn't bad by itself. But from a practical > > point of view, over-emphasizing strong typing made > > interfacing to C a virtual necessity > > for projects of any significant complexity. > > Not at all. I have a 180,000 line Ada project which does interface > to another language for other reasons (not to get weak typing). But > the language I chose was certainly not C. Are you under the impression > there are only two languages in the world. > > > (C and later C++ style of type-safety turned out to > > be good enough for real-world projects.) > > Like Windows ? You must live in a different world from me -- I look around, and from the web-browser to the newsreaders to the email software to the software transporting your packets full of Ada praise to the software controlling the switching stations enroute to... You don't like Windows, so you must be using what? Unix and X-Windows? Written/extended/in Ada? Surely Ada was there when most of X-Windows and Motif happened? Or at least when the CD-ROM device drivers were being written? What now did you say these very expensive Ada projects actually do?