Re: Socioeconomics, Ada, C++

[enag@ifi.uio.no (Erik Naggum)]

In article <SRCTRAN.91May6233619@world.std.com>, Gregory Aharonian writes:

    Only in central planned economies are "obviously great" ideas
    "successful" nationally. In free markets, [it's the] survival of
    the "fittest".  Considering the number of students learning C++,
    the number of commercial enterprises using C++ voluntarily for
    their products, and the number of companies able to make their
    living supplying reusable C++ libraries and services - versus the
    Ada world - one can only conclude that C++ is the "fittest", while
    it is plain to see that Ada is "obviously great".

    The technical superiority of C++ or Ada is irrelevant, no one will
    ever agree. What counts to people trying to make a living in free
    markets is what sells. And all I see selling is C++.

Yes and no.  Yes, making a living today is based on doing what's in
vogue today.  No, making a living tomorrow is based on making sound
decisions, including knowledge of technical superiority.  I thank the
Free Market that there are people out there who think longer-range
than those who only aim to survive the current fiscal year.

It's possible to influence tomorrow by providing the "next generation"
with the proper ideas.  (Pepsi got the idea.)  Unix, or many of the
ideas behind Unix, anyhow, became popular because the next generation
was provided the prerequisite toys to play with to make the whole
world go Unix in less than 20 years.  We're seeing an even shorter
time period between new idea and popularity these days, but it still
takes time.

In an industry where three seconds is a long time, ten years is next
to no time.

--
[Erik Naggum]           Professional Programmer        <enag@ifi.uio.no>
Naggum Software             Electronic Text          <erik@naggum.uu.no>
0118 OSLO, NORWAY       Computer Communications            +47-2-836-863