Re: Ada The Best Language?

["Marin David Condic" <marin.condic.auntie.spam@pacemicro.com>]

Granted, the Unix world is somewhat different from the Windows world, but
not *so* different that it doesn't count to have an integrated set of tools.
The *specifics* of *what* tools get integrated may be debatable, but I think
that developers on Unix still would want better integration than they get
from Ada currently. Look at what you get with Java from Sun (used to get?)
and you see more than just a command-line compiler and references to other
tools that might be used. They provide class libraries to get all kinds of
work done under Unix as well as tools for helping you build your app beyond
just a compiler.

There are, of course, other factors that create resistance on the part of
developers & managers toward adopting Ada. Some of those you can't possibly
overcome from the outside - they require a change of heart from within. But
I believe that if there were more spiffy development environments that
matched & exceeded what is available for other languages, this would remove
*lots* of existing barriers. Developers may just start to play with the IDE
out of curiosity to see if it is at all better than what they are currently
using. They might see some additional tools that don't exist on their
platforms now that might make development easier, more fun, more leveraged,
etc. They may not initially *like* Ada, but they might begin to adapt to it
if the IDE offered them some significant advantages over what they have.

Beyond an editor, GUI builder & debugger, what sort of things might make the
IDE more attractive? Perhaps someone works up a model for developing apps
and does a whole pile of code generation for the user based on asking
questions and filling in the blanks on a "wizard-like" interaction? Maybe
the interfaces are so clean, easy to understand, intuitively obvious & well
documented that it makes getting an app up and running a snap in comparison
to other tools? Maybe there is a class library that provides lots of easy to
use & well documented data structures, math libraries, OS interfaces, etc.
that the higher level of abstraction possible in Ada gets to shine &
everyone is amazed with how far they get in such a short development time?
Lots of things might contribute to making an Ada IDE more attractive than
equivalent C++ or Java tools...

Its just an idea that I keep spitballing around. I'm tinkering right now
with some things I think might work toward that end, but there's just
little-old-me hammering away at it in my spare time hoping to get something
that might pay off. Its really something that would take a well financed
company or a bunch of dedicated hobyists working together to do right.
Still, I'm convinced that it is a necessary condition to becoming a bigtime
player...

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B607BC0.B1233965@home.com...
> Marin David Condic wrote:
> > Probably the important factors are not finding more productivity studies
or
> > arguing the case with one's bosses/peers - although I doubt that hurts.
My
> > guess is that a more important factor is/will be the availability of
good
> > tools. Well, good tools decidedly already exist. Lets make that "good
tools
> > integrated into a development kit".
>
> I'm not certain the "itegration" issue is that big a deal. Granted, it
makes
> purchasing/acquisition simpler. I think developers on Windows systems
think
> more along these lines, only because they are used to Microsoft/Borland
etc.
> bundling their products along these lines.
>
> In the UNIX world however, I don't think this thinking is quite so
mainstream.
> After all, you want a compiler that fits your
cost/reliability/conformance/
> validation requirements. You choose your source control tools on the basis
> of standards/company mandate/personal preference etc. You choose your
editor
> often on religious grounds. You choose your debugger on cost/productivity
> basis maybe.
>
> In short, you choose the set of tools that work best for you. Many use vi
> in the UNIX world, for whatever reasons. Others use GNU emacs, or elvis.
> I've personally always used a heavily customized version of MicroEMACS.
> But within a group of UNIX developers, you are likely to find just as
> many preferences ;-)
>
> Having said all that, I do know that a large portion of these developers
> like the IDE approach (if given the choice). I myself do not like them,
> but then, maybe I'm strange that way.
>
> I find that the combination of my own modified editor,
> custom tools, command line editing (emacs mode of course) etc., allow
> me to be much more effective than any IDE has allowed me to be. Make files
> do the rest.
>
> Yet I grant that others do like IDEs, and perhaps perform better that
> way.
>
> I personally don't see this "integration matter" as the issue. Management
> doesn't argue against it at this level -- they site the cost of finding
> Ada developers, the fact that it is "unusual" or "not popular". They also
> site that we cannot train people on "Ada" because they themselves may not
> want to be in that area as a career choice. These are the types of issues
> I see and hear.  Rarely is the resistance based upon technical/packaging
> details.
>
> Just my $0.02 Cdn.
>
> --
> Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
> http://members.home.net/ve3wwg