Re: Ada The Best Language?

["Mark Lundquist" <up.yerz@nospam.com>]

"codesavvy" <codesavvy@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5be89e2f.0107170838.c71ad61@posting.google.com...
> How come it is not more widely accepted?

That is a very good question.

The simple answer -- a truism really -- is that for most decision-makers,
the perceived costs are not overcome by the perceived benefits.

So if we suppose for the sake of argument that the Ada advocates are right,
then Ada is not more widely accepted because (a) the marginal cost of
choosing Ada over the alternatives are supposed to be higher than the true
marginal cost; and/or (b) the benefits of using Ada are not sufficiently
understood or appreciated.

The way this actually plays out is pretty complex and gets into a lot of
history.  But I think at the core, it's a "critical mass" phenomenon (of
which "self-fulfilling prophecies" represent a case).  For a thorough
treatment of thos concept, I highly recommend Thomas C. Schelling's book,
"Micromotives and Macrobehavior", and especially chapter 3, "Thermostats,
lemons, and other families of models".

If I perceive that few others are choosing Language X, then I will tend to
believe that choosing Language X will place me at a disadvantage.  Everyone
else is thinking the same way.  As a result, adoption and retention of
Language X declines.  It takes a high level of perceived value to overcome
this (as indeed it has done for those who are choosing Ada).

> The stuff I read here states
> that it is because the rest of the world is stupid.

You might see that here sometimes.  Mostly it's hyperbole, and some posters
here are more given to that than others.  You'll also see it in combination
with anti-Microsuck^H^H^Hoft ranting (sorry! :-).

I think most participants in this ng would say that "the rest of the world"
is simply wrong, not necessarily stupid.

Incidentally, the level of one-true-languagism expressed on this ng seems to
have gone down over the past year or two.  Here you can find Ada fans who
are also fans of Eiffel, OCAML, Haskell, Ruby, and other languages.

>  From what I can
> tell there is plenty of crappy code written in Ada.

Definitely true.  There's plenty of crap written in every language, and will
be in every language that has yet to be invented.  But this is hardly
relevant, don't you think?  I've never seen anyone say that code written in
any particular language can be considered good, solely by virtue of its
having been written in that language.

>  I think many who
> share the view that Ada is the best programming language offering
> significant advantages over other programming language might want to
> re-think their positions.

OK, I think Ada's the best, but I'm willing to re-think my position.  But
since it's a thoughtfully held position in the first place, I will probably
need some help -- are you willing to provide it?

-- mark