Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability)

[Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>]

nicolas <n.brunot@cadwin.com> wrote:
 
: I don't think you understood what is the problem.
: Don't spend your time trying to convince me, you have the whole rest of the
: world to convince ...

(Note: I'm not writing to convince you, but I found
the style of your postings could easily make later readers
misunderstand. Someone said fear-mongering, and I have to agree
... Gosh why have I started this)

<:-) spoof-mode>
Certainly.  You know, don't try to fool me, Ada isn't exactely
Software Heaven, Ada envs are not as easy to use as Java, and
some libraries are not for free and aren't portable, and out
of the box, which is against Ada rationale. And if this won't
change by introduction of cost-free standard big libraries,
Ada will cease to exist "in 5 or 10 years" and that's "not very
important." Who knows?

Much the same situation as with APL. You know, that dead
language from decades ago that only a few APL fans are still
using. A bit puzzling that these guys are not exactly starving,
and that development has been continuous and stable, despite
the lack of standard workspaces, but ask anyone... I'll stay
with popular languages.

Conclusion: 99%+ of all software projects in the future
will not use any language but one that has free standard DWIM libraries,
and this language is not going to be Ada.
</:-)>


I think I failed in explaining that there is no necessity
to follow each and every of your implicit or explicit criteria
of estimating what matters are like and should be like now.
Your style of argument
suggested to me that there is ("Everyone..., just ask.").
One criterion seems to be polularity. 
You know what? I'm happy in my niche when it allows
me to live, and all I care (a bit) is that this niche isn't
shrinking too much. And I'm writing Java and have written Windows
programs.  No problem.