* Re: Programming languages
[not found] ` <b6qulb$o6l$1@news.onet.pl>
@ 2003-04-07 9:50 ` John R. Strohm
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: John R. Strohm @ 2003-04-07 9:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
"kat-Zygfryd" <6667@wp.pl> wrote in message
news:b6qulb$o6l$1@news.onet.pl...
> I've writing a mud for some time now in C++
> but decided lately to re-write it in Ada.
> The reason was that although a C++ MUD
> may work a little faster, reading and extending
> Ada code is much simpler. Moreover Ada code
> is more standarized, so it's not a big problem to
> switch between compilers/archs, where my C++
> code compiles well under some compilers and
> doesn't compile at all on others.
> And... Ada has got an IDE with very sexy
> diagram rendering (GRASP)
I've added a followup to comp.lang.ada, as this will be at least mildly
interesting to some of the people there.
When you finish this, please drop a note to comp.lang.ada, ideally some
comments about how it went and lessons learned along the way. MUD
programming is almost exclusively a C/C++ domain these days; the mere
existence of an Ada-based MUD would go a ways toward convincing some people
that Ada really is a general-purpose programming language. Also, the fact
that you did it in Ada without being coerced by a US DoD contract clause
will carry some weight. (For some reason, no one wants to believe Boeing
when they say they used, and required all their subcontractors to use, Ada
for the 777 because it was a whole lot better than C/C++.)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread