Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!ajpo.sei.cmu.edu!wellerd]

In article <BwvCGp.6o3@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian)
 writes:
>
>    I recently received in the mail the advance outline for the 1993 OBJECT
>WORLD conference and exposition, to be held in Boston February 2-4, 1993.
>The direct mail piece included a list of past and present exhibitors at
>OBJECT WORLD, as follows:
> [Long list of vendors]
>
>For those who have gone, as reflected by these companies, this conference has
>a heavy C/C++/Smalltalk domination, which is great for these companies and
>languages.  For those in the commercial world, this is the conference to
>attend to learn about and shop for object oriented technology, or to expose
>yourself to people making these decisions.

Ascually, OOPSLA is the _real_ conference, which is sponsored by ACM. Object
World is sponsored by SIGS.  Guess whose pockets I'd rather line? :-)

>
>BUT WHERE IS THE ADA CROWD?  Reading comp.lang.ada, ADA is THE object oriented
>language.  Yet why doesn't anyone put my tax money where their mouths are?
>Why doesn't AJPO and the ADAIC have a booth where they can tout all of the
>benefit's Ada has had for the DoD?  Why doesn't SEI and STARS have booths
>where they can tell about Ada, CASE, and object oriented stuff.  Where are the
>STARS primes, IBM/PARAMAX/BOEING, telling the commercial world what they tell
>the DoD about Ada and STARS.  Where are sub-cons like TRW, SAIC, IDA and
>Honeywell?  Why isn't CARDS at the show trying to sign up people in the
>commercial world to use their reusable components library? Where where where? 
>
Um, I don't recall ANY post on thus sub referring to Ada as THE object-
oriented language. (Historically speaking anyway, "THE" was an operating
system :-)   As for the lack of Ada participation, I doubt you'll see it
this year or next.  Even Rational, which was in Vancouver last week at
OOPSLA '92, wasn't "selling" Ada.  There has been, however, a growing
acceptance of Ada in the OO domain.  Last year, if I mentioned the "A-word",
I was met with giggles or "poor you"s, this year it seemed a little
different.  I think the big reason is that OO developers, especially C++
developers, are beginning to have problems developing large projects. Mind
you, "large" to a C++er is over 50KSLOC.  Then they look at me strangely
when I giggle and say "poor you"s.  Language wars aside, people are learning 
that Ada's (current) lack of inheritance and run-time dispatching doesn't
equate to the fact you can't build an object-oriented system in it.  Most
Ada developers have known this for over a decade, long before Bjarne was
even THINKING about C++.  Frankly, I'm kinda glad some of those companies
you listed above don't show up at Object WOrld (or OOPSLA).  And, just as
a final comment to your paragraph, my company had a very strong presence
at OOPSLA this year, and we use Ada almost exclusively.

>Until Ada gains general market acceptance, sole reliance on it by the DoD
>will drive up defense software costs, as tools, libraries and programmers
>in the general population ignore Ada.  Maybe the DoD should start looking
>for new Ada contractors, contractors that tell their defense customers and
>their commercial customers the same story.
>

I don't follow your logic (if I may be so bold).  Ada's problems (against
the BCPL family (BCPL,C,C++<pick a version>)) are driven more by economics
than technical superiority.  I think the DoD/AJPO learned that lesson well
with Ada 83, which is why you'll see GNU Ada 9X next summer.

>Gregory Aharonian
>Source Translation & Optimization
>
Are you SURE you name's not Ted Holden? :-) :-) :-)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Weller,         | Space Station Training Facility: Like the real
CAE-Link,             | thing, only you can step outside for a breath
Space Technology Div. | of fresh air!
----I'm the Ultimate International Masochist: I speak Ada AND Esperanto!-----

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[Michael Feldman]

In article <1992Oct29.124447.26334@sei.cmu.edu> wellerd@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (David
 Weller) writes:
>>
[lots of good stuff deleted]

>Um, I don't recall ANY post on thus sub referring to Ada as THE object-
>oriented language. (Historically speaking anyway, "THE" was an operating
>system :-)   

Aha! Today's trivia quiz: what does THE stand for? (HINT: It has NOTHING
to do with the definite article).

Answer: Technische Hogeschool Eindhoven, or Eindhoven Institute of
Technology, in The Netherlands. That's where Dijkstra did all that
seminal work on concurrent programming, including the THE system...:-)

Thinking we need a break from the language wars, I remain yours truly,

Mike Feldman

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[csn!news.den.mmc.com!possum.den.mmc.com!sims]

wellerd@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (David Weller @ Ada Joint Program Office) writes

>  I think the big reason is that OO developers, especially C++
> developers, are beginning to have problems developing large projects. Mind
> you, "large" to a C++er is over 50KSLOC.  Then they look at me strangely
> when I giggle and say "poor you"s.  Language wars aside, people are learning 
> > > that Ada's (current) lack of inheritance and run-time dispatching doesn't
> equate to the fact you can't build an object-oriented system in it.  Most
> Ada developers have known this for over a decade, long before Bjarne was
				     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Hmm, your copy of 1815A must be different from mine.  I could swear mine
is dated 1983, which seems to be a little shy of a decade ago, at least
according to my calendar.  And wasn't it the early mid 80s before
reasonable compilers came out?

John
-- 
John Sims    sims@pogo.den.mmc.com

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[fred j mccall 575-3539]

In <1992Oct30.150426.19736@den.mmc.com> sims@possum.den.mmc.com (John Sims) wri
tes:

>And wasn't it the early mid 80s before
>reasonable compilers came out?

The first REASONABLE compiler I remember was in around late 1984 or
early 1985 on a Data General machine.  I never personally used it, but
I do remember people complaining that the environment was, uh, ARCANE.

The world has changed much since then, and for the better.  Now if
only they can get the PRICES down for 'full-up' Ada compilers,
particularly for PC-class machines and under UNIX/POSIX.  Perhaps that
would finally make it take off.

-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[david.c.willett]

>From article <1992Oct30.210810.2104@mksol.dseg.ti.com>, by mccall@mksol.dseg.t
i.com (fred j mccall 575-3539):
> In <1992Oct30.150426.19736@den.mmc.com> sims@possum.den.mmc.com (John Sims) w
rites:
> 
>>And wasn't it the early mid 80s before
>>reasonable compilers came out?
> 
> The first REASONABLE compiler I remember was in around late 1984 or
> early 1985 on a Data General machine.  I never personally used it, but
> I do remember people complaining that the environment was, uh, ARCANE.
> 
> The world has changed much since then, and for the better.  Now if
> only they can get the PRICES down for 'full-up' Ada compilers,
> particularly for PC-class machines and under UNIX/POSIX.  Perhaps that
> would finally make it take off.
> 
> -- 
> "Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
>  in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for m
e.

Fred's point is well taken, but I think the momentum might be going the other
way.  That is -- prices for high-horsepower hardware may be falling fast 
enough that it's economical to buy a workstation for which an Ada compiler
already exists.  I'm presuming that you were planning to buy that (X>4)86
wonder anyway.

Dave

-- 

It's kinda like a Lost and Found in a border town
You're askin' 'bout a diamond ring
They just look at you like you've lost your mind

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[Robert I. Eachus]

     Although the first Ada compiler validations were in 1983 (NYU and
ROLM), there were other Ada compilers around, especially including
Telesoft.  By the end of 1984, there were 8 validated compilers
including DEC Ada.

--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[pa.dec.com!rdg.dec.com!ljohub.enet.dec.com!jessop]

>BUT WHERE IS THE ADA CROWD?  Reading comp.lang.ada, ADA is THE object oriented
>language.  Yet why doesn't anyone put my tax money where their mouths are?

I can't say for certain... but I HOPE DEC will present Ada along w/ C++ and
whatever else they are displaying.

DEC makes THE best Ada compiler and library system (as far as I'm concerned).
Also...  the current version of Ada is not considered a fully OO language, tho'
it lends itself to OO design and programing.  The next version of Ada (L.D.)
(I hear) will make it a true OO language.

I could be wrong... feel free to correct me...?

Mike

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[Benjamin Thomas Ketteridge]

from message by jessop@ljohub.enet.dec.com (Class Dinosauria):
> Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

   .. stuff deleted ..

> DEC makes THE best Ada compiler and library system (as far as I'm concerned).

Isn't it rather obvious that the author of this message is likely to support
DEC Ada, (I wonder his boss reads comp.lang.ada :-) :-) )

But seriously: I would agree that the DEC Ada compiler is pretty good - I use i
t
every day. I would prefer to use the Alsys Ada compiler, but that is no longer
supported by our local support team :-( the DEC Ada compile-time messages are
very good, but it suffers from C-like run-time error-messages (this is not
surprising since the main program of DEC Ada programs is actually in C!)

The DEC Ada libraries are good, tho' I haven't tried using the X binding yet.

ciao
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|    _|--|_    | Disclaimer: I know nothing! Do you really know anything?  |
|     (\/)     +-------------------------------+---------------------------+
|      vv      | We've a Gremlin in the works! |      btk@aber.ac.uk       |
+--------------+-------------------------------+---------------------------+

Re: More Ashamedness of Ada - this time OBJECT WORLD

[news]

In article <1992Nov11.142808.17224@aber.ac.uk>, btk@aber.ac.uk (Benjamin Thomas
 Ketteridge) writes:
 
^every day. I would prefer to use the Alsys Ada compiler, but that is no longer
^supported by our local support team :-( the DEC Ada compile-time messages are
^very good, but it suffers from C-like run-time error-messages (this is not
^surprising since the main program of DEC Ada programs is actually in C!)

You wouldn't expect them to write anything that complex in a goof language
like Ada, would you?

-- 
Ted Holden
HTE