Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability)

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

I understood what you were getting at: Having or not having tools doesn't
have anything to do with safety issues, but it does have to do with helping
to make the language more popular.

There is a certain amount of advocacy that goes on here - I am as guilty as
the next guy. :-) I agree that it doesn't really help anything to avoid
discussing the issues that may be keeping Ada from gaining acceptance.
Changing the subject and concentrating entirely on where Ada is superior
tends to not get the other issues addressed. Having a nice integrated
toolset including class libraries, GUI builder, debugger, IDE, etc. are all
things that would help make Ada more popular. Discussion about what those
tools should look like, how they should get made, how they should get
distributed, etc., are all going to contribute something positive.

It also helps to take the advocacy from C.L.A. and apply it elsewhere so we
aren't just preaching to the choir.

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/


"nicolas" <n.brunot@cadwin.com> wrote in message
news:TLt97.9335$Xa.790630@nnrp4.proxad.net...
>
> Not at all, just saying that those tools don't go against safety, and so
> that safety cannot be an excuse for their absence.
>
> First note that we've been writing 99% of our code in Ada since around
1987,
> so we are not especially new to Ada, nor denying its qualities.
> I would also say that it is not a very good thing to have a "favourite
> language", because a good programmer should choose a language as a tool
for
> a specific purpose, not for his personal feelings. It is nothing more than
a
> tool.
> A very big problem of Ada, is that a lot of Ada users are so fan of it,
that
> they deny obvious problems which prevent its wider use, and don't get
fixed.
>
> The problem is more about IDE, GUI and libraries, I know there are
excellent
> debuggers for Ada
> we use or have been using Alsys, Objectada, Apex, Verdix etc ...
> we tried GVD, which seems very promising, but still wondering how to
display
> the value of a string variable (not always easy in -O0, almost impossible
> in -O1 or -O2 ...)
> This is an excellent example of amazing capabilities, and incredible
> elementary problems as well.
>
> To get back to the the original point, it was there is no integrated and
> frendly complete development kit for Ada, comparable to what any debutant
> find for popular languages.
> And unfortunately, a common Ada fan reaction to this is to give examples
to
> show that Ada is safer than other languages.
>
> 1/ This is something every Ada user, and a lot of other people even if
they
> are not using Ada, aknowledge,
> 2/ It has absolutely nothing to do with the question.
>
> The question could be
> - Ada has a lot of excellent qualities, but it is everything but popular.
> The lack of integrated environment and standard libraries coming with the
> compiler has certainly something to do with it.
>
> The answer was
> - Ada is safer ...
>
> Yes, I know it is safer, everybody knows, that's not the question, and if
> this is the only answer which can be given to someone thinking  in using
> Ada, I think he'll wait for a real answer to his question.
>
> Even among Ada users I saw more than once this kind of situation :
>
> - Hey, there is a problem
> - No, there is no problem, you must be wrong
> - No there is a problem, here it is, how can I solve it ?
> - you must be doing it wrong ... (No answer to the problem ...)
> - Here is what, according to me, proves there is problem, but may be I
> missed something ...
> - Are you sure you really need to do that ? (change subject ...)
> - Yes I do, I think there is a problem and nobody gives a solution ...
> - Ada is much safer  (So what ? we all know that ... nothing more about
the
> problem ... end of the discussion ...)
>
>
>
>