Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[CONDIC]

From: Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
Subject: Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??
Original_To:  PROFS%"SMTP@PWAGPDB"
Original_cc:  CONDIC



David Weller <dweller@STARBASE.NEOSOFT.COM> writes:
>
>Actually, you've been described as the greatest invention since
>bellybutton lint. :-)
>
I hear that NASA has discovered that bellybutton lint could be
the most energetic rocket fuel available in a stable form - and
hence could be worth quite a bit of money. Or was that cat
hairballs? ;-)

Pax
Marin


Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer    ATT:        407.796.8997
M/S 731-93                                      Technet:    796.8997
Pratt & Whitney, GESP                           Internet:   CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
P.O. Box 109600                                 Internet:   MDCONDIC@AOL.COM
West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600
===============================================================================
    "I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked
    with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is
    a fad that won't last out the year."

        --  The editor in charge of business books for Prentice
            Hall, 1957.
===============================================================================

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[CONDIC]

From: Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
Subject: Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??
Original_To:  PROFS%"SMTP@PWAGPDB"
Original_cc:  CONDIC



David Emery <emery@GOLDFINGER.MITRE.ORG> writes:
>
>6.  Ada programmers are much less egotistical, in the sense that they
>view programming as a group activity (rather than an individual
>activity).
>
I don't know - I'm about as egotistical as they come. (Unless, of
course, you subscribe to the theory that I really am the greatest
invention since shirt pockets ;-) I've never found that to be an
impediment to being an Ada programmer.

Maybe C, with it's terse syntax, appeals to those with little
desire to express themselves at length - or just don't like to
type. Whereas Ada, with it's self-documenting syntax and
encouraged use of long, descriptive names, appeals to those who
are naturally more verbose - or at least have learned to use a
keyboard well enough that posting a message isn't an exercise in
hunt-and-peck typing.

I suppose that's about as good a theory as any other - eh? ;-)

Pax,
Marin

Marin David Condic, Senior Computer Engineer    ATT:        407.796.8997
M/S 731-93                                      Technet:    796.8997
Pratt & Whitney, GESP                           Internet:   CONDICMA@PWFL.COM
P.O. Box 109600                                 Internet:   MDCONDIC@AOL.COM
West Palm Beach, FL 33410-9600
===============================================================================
    "I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked
    with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is
    a fad that won't last out the year."

        --  The editor in charge of business books for Prentice
            Hall, 1957.
===============================================================================

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[tmoran]

hbaker@netcom.com (Henry G. Baker) wrote:
> I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
> relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.
> ....
> I have a hard time believing that this is the same as the
> ratio of the number of Ada programmers to C/C++ programmers.  (One
> glance at computer selection at Barnes & Noble bookstore tells a
> completely different story.)

Perhaps there are many people trying to teach themselves C/C++ in
hopes of changing to a high paying career in computer programming.

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[gpetrey]

>   tmoran@bix.com writes:
>  hbaker@netcom.com (Henry G. Baker) wrote:
>  > I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
>  > relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.
>  > ....
>  > I have a hard time believing that this is the same as the
>  > ratio of the number of Ada programmers to C/C++ programmers.  (One
>  > glance at computer selection at Barnes & Noble bookstore tells a
>  > completely different story.)
>  
>  Perhaps there are many people trying to teach themselves C/C++ in
>  hopes of changing to a high paying career in computer programming.
>  
>>>>
If that's the case, they better stick with Ada - C programmers are a dime a dozen.

How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Henry Baker]

I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  On many days the ratio is
about 1:3, meaning 1 Ada message for every 3 C messages or every 4 C++
messages.  I have a hard time believing that this is the same as the
ratio of the number of Ada programmers to C/C++ programmers.  (One
glance at computer selection at Barnes & Noble bookstore tells a
completely different story.)

I can only speculate on the reasons for this:

1.  The Ada language itself is so complex that no one can understand it
without asking a lot of questions.

2.  Ada people work on harder problems which require more consultation.

3.  Usenet is getting only a fraction of the C and C++ questions -- the
Compu$erve and Airheads Online forums handle most of their questions.

4.  Ada people are lonely, and talk to each other to cheer one another
up (ditto for comp.lang.lisp).

etc.

Anyone else have any thoughts as to why this is?

(Other than because of stupid questions like this one :-) :-)

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Jahn Rentmeister]

Henry Baker (hbaker@netcom.com) wrote:
: I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
: relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  On many days the ratio is
: about 1:3, meaning 1 Ada message for every 3 C messages or every 4 C++
: messages.  I have a hard time believing that this is the same as the
: ratio of the number of Ada programmers to C/C++ programmers.  (One
: glance at computer selection at Barnes & Noble bookstore tells a
: completely different story.)

: I can only speculate on the reasons for this:

How about these reasons: For Ada, a new Standard has just been done, a new,
free compiler is in progress, and the ratio of people learning Ada in
beginning programmer's courses compared to those learning C or C++ in
beginning courses is "better" (imho) than that of Ada programmers to C/C++
programmers. 

I know more people learning Ada than working with Ada. I know no one learning 
C. (Well, now guess what they're teaching to students here.)

Back in the days when GNAT was not widely ported and Ada9X was "far away",
traffic around here was less.

There's another reason:
People who know Ada and learn C or C++ will hardly ever ask any stupid
questions: Those who have seen the light are enlightened. But the C/C++
programmers learning Ada ...
:-)

And of course, the C/C++ groups lack the support of the deadly Ada mandate (tm)
--
## PsionCrosspoint 3a Series V 0.99 B ##

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[David Emery]

Here's my hypotheses:

5.  Ada programmers understand the language well enough to ask
questions about the language.
     (akin to the comment that Ada people ask "is this legal?" while
      C people ask "what will this do when it executes?")

6.  Ada programmers are much less egotistical, in the sense that they
view programming as a group activity (rather than an individual
activity).

7.  Ada95 is new enough that people have some real questions on HOW
the language should be used.  By now users of other languages have
settled on 'style' issue.  But I seem to remember similar large
discussions in the early days of comp.lang.c++.

			       dave
--
--The preceeding opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of
--The MITRE Corporation or its sponsors. 
-- "A good plan violently executed -NOW- is better than a perfect plan
--  next week"                                      George Patton
-- "Any damn fool can write a plan.  It's the execution that gets you
--  all screwed up"                              James Hollingsworth
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[David Weller]

In article <EMERY.95Jan31100844@goldfinger.mitre.org>,
David Emery <emery@goldfinger.mitre.org> wrote:
>the language should be used.  By now users of other languages have
>settled on 'style' issue.  But I seem to remember similar large
>discussions in the early days of comp.lang.c++.
>

True.  In fact (IMHO), about 50% of the traffic on comp.lang.c++
seems to be discussions about:

Which is better: Borland, Microsoft, GNU, or Watcom C++?

IMHO, again, the signal to noise ratio is higher on the c++ newsgroup.

-- 
      Frustrated with C, C++, Pascal, Fortran?  Ada95 _might_ be for you!
	  For all sorts of interesting Ada95 tidbits, run the command:
"finger dweller@starbase.neosoft.com | more" (or e-mail with "finger" as subj.)
	

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[David O'Brien]

In article <EMERY.95Jan31100844@goldfinger.mitre.org> you wrote:
: Here's my hypotheses:

8.  comp.lang.{c,c++} have so much traffic it takes just too much time
to keep up.  And so much of it is noise.  Thus I'd say the signal to
noise ratio is lower and thus worth reading.

9.  With a smaller community of those writting articles you can actually
remember who said what and what they stand for.  (ie. you know I'll get
into any thread with erronious C code in it.  ;-) )

-- David O'Brien    (dobrien@seas.gwu.edu)

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Paul H. Whittington]

hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) wrote:
>
> I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
> relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  On many days the ratio is
> about 1:3, meaning 1 Ada message for every 3 C messages or every 4 C++
> messages.  I have a hard time believing that this is the same as the
> ratio of the number of Ada programmers to C/C++ programmers.  (One
> glance at computer selection at Barnes & Noble bookstore tells a
> completely different story.)
> 
> I can only speculate on the reasons for this:
> 
> 1.  The Ada language itself is so complex that no one can understand it
> without asking a lot of questions.
> 
> 2.  Ada people work on harder problems which require more consultation.
> 
> 3.  Usenet is getting only a fraction of the C and C++ questions -- the
> Compu$erve and Airheads Online forums handle most of their questions.
> 
> 4.  Ada people are lonely, and talk to each other to cheer one another
> up (ditto for comp.lang.lisp).
> 
> etc.
> 
> Anyone else have any thoughts as to why this is?
> 
> (Other than because of stupid questions like this one :-) :-)

Being well versed in C, C++, Ada, PASCAL, and MODULA-2 and programming
in all of them on a regular basis I can honestly say that there are
at least four reasons why Ada has not caught on and become more
commercially popular in the USA (It is quite popular in other
countries):

1) Although Ada was one of the first Object based languages to be
standardized internationally, in 1983, the 1983 version of Ada lacked
dynamic polymorphism and inheritance.  

The 1995 version of Ada, now being approved as an international
standard, includes full object-oriented programming support including
encapsulation, polymorphism, inheritance and templates (called 
generics in Ada), not to mention a complete integrated multi-tasking
standard and several other standard support libraries.

2) The available Ada compilers have been expensive to purchase and
lacking in both their execution performance and code generation
quality.

Thanks to the wise use of a million or so of our hard earned US tax
dollars, the quality and capabilities of academic persons the
world over, and the communications capabilities of the Internet,
their is now a GNU Ada95 compiler available for FREE! (ftp://cs.nyu.edu)
The GNAT compiler, as its called, shares the same high quality back
end used by other GNU compilers like C and C++, and runs quite a bit
faster on my P-90 running NT 3.5 than some of the commercial offerings
I've used.

3) The Ada83 version of the language lacked the language support 
required to enable the integration of commercially available application
development support tools like debuggers, linkers, and component 
libraries, as well as the machinery required to interface to todays
modern GUI based OSes (e.g. UNIX/MOTIF, Windows, NT, MAC OS).

Again, the Ada95 version of the language solves all of these problems
and it is now almost a cake walk to interface Ada programs with
support DLLs written MODULA-2, C, C++ and PASCAL written internally 
and purchased from third party vendors.

4) Maybe, and I don't mean to punch anybody in the nose here, until
now program size and complexity has not over stressed the limits of
C and/or C++.  Ada was designed from the outset to support the DoD's
requirements to develop very large and reliable software systems.
Studies done (search for AJPO on the Internet) have shown a marked
imporvement in software quality in Ada projects vs. C and C++.  The
point is well made in the most recent issue of Software Development
magazine (There's an article on using Ada for Windows programming)
where the author suggests that Ada may just be the answer to managing
the proliferation of APIs in the Windows programming arena.

My suggestion is take a good long look at Ada.  Don't dismiss it 
because some liberal C hacker CS prof. you had in the 80's said "Ada 
is a piece of garbage language developed by the bomb builders."
Get a copy of GNAT for your favorite OS, download one of the several
Ada95 tutorials available on Internet, and spend a few hours (days?)
learning the capabilities of Ada.

TTFN <;-|)

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Robert Dewar]

There are a couple of obvious answers on why the Ada traffic is relatively
high.

  First: a lot of it is advocacy junk, which would better in my mind be
  moved to some other group, separating the technical content out.
  
  Second: we have a new standard, widely available, which naturally
  generates questions and interest. The C++ proposed standard is by
  contrast not very available (honk if you have a copy :-) but when
  it does come out, there will be LOTS of questions.

  Third: A lot of the Ada community is, and has always been, very internet
  oriented (after all the original Ada, as well as Ada 9X, was developed
  depending heavily on the internet, certainly NOT true of C!)

  Fourth: a lot of the comp.lang.ada traffic comes from a few individuals
  (remove feldman, dewar, baker, aharonian, T.E.D and a few others, and
  the volume will be way down :-)

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Jules]

In article <hbaker-3001951716250001@192.0.2.1>,
	hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes:
>I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
>relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  On many days the ratio is
>about 1:3, meaning 1 Ada message for every 3 C messages or every 4 C++
>messages.  I have a hard time believing that this is the same as the
>ratio of the number of Ada programmers to C/C++ programmers.  (One
>glance at computer selection at Barnes & Noble bookstore tells a
>completely different story.)
>
>I can only speculate on the reasons for this:
>
>1.  The Ada language itself is so complex that no one can understand it
>without asking a lot of questions.
>
>2.  Ada people work on harder problems which require more consultation.
>
>3.  Usenet is getting only a fraction of the C and C++ questions -- the
>Compu$erve and Airheads Online forums handle most of their questions.
>
>4.  Ada people are lonely, and talk to each other to cheer one another
>up (ditto for comp.lang.lisp).
>
>etc.
>
>Anyone else have any thoughts as to why this is?

Perhaps it's because you don't get flamed to hell for making mistakes in
postings in comp.lang.ada.

Apologies to comp.lang.c, but when I posted a comment there recently, and
made a stupid mistake (one of those obvious things, where you can see exactly
what I mean, but it's not exactly what I say), not only were there 6 (or
could be 7) followups to my message, saying exactly why this is wrong,
pointing out that a) I shouldn't EVER do what I said I do, and b) how the
compiler wouldn't compile it anyway, I also recieved around 10 mail messages
on the same subject.

And this is not uncommon.



-- 
/* Julian R Hall				csusb@csv.warwick.ac.uk
   
   Flames should be redirected to /dev/null - I don't know what
   I'm saying myself so don't expect it to make sense all the time!         */

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Samuel Mize]

In article <hbaker-3001951716250001@192.0.2.1>,
Henry Baker <hbaker@netcom.com> wrote:
>I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
>relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  ...

>I can only speculate on the reasons for this:
>
>1.  The Ada language itself is so complex ...

>Anyone else have any thoughts as to why this is?

n) A lot of computer-literate people are looking into Ada for the
   first time.  When one is learning C, one is usually also learning
   about computers.

n+1) Basic information about Ada is not well distributed, so we
     get a lot of ignorant questions.  A lot of colleges are
     only now joining the Ada bandwagon, so they don't have local
     expertise built up (while any college, including colleges
     without CS departments, has a couple of C hackers around to
     ask questions of).

     Thus, we get questions like these recent ones:  is there a
     book that describes the standard Ada packages?  (The LRM.)
     How do you do unblocking terminal I/O in DEC Ada?  (use the
     STARLET package.)  Where is it in STARLET?  (vi STARLET.ada ;
     /character<cr> ; repeat until you find the right call.  Or
     look in the DEC documents.)  How do I XXX in Ada?  (Often,
     RTF LRM).

n+2) I run into a lot of people, here and elsewhere, who have
     learned Ada as a second language, using a textbook, and who
     try to code significant Ada programs using ONLY that text.
     Blow the $US 8 for an LRM.  (Govt printing office, you can
     mail order it; most big cities have a GPO bookstore.)  Learn
     to read it (takes a little time to get used to the elaborate
     Ada terms, like "elaborate").

     Then you can stop asking "how do I do MOD arithmetic" etc.

In short, the Ada information distribution infrastructure is not
nearly as well established as the one for C/C++, so comp.lang.ada
takes up some of the slack.

Sam Mize - smize@starbase.neosoft.com

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Richard G. Hash]

> Henry Baker <hbaker@netcom.com> wrote:
> >I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
> >relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  ...

If I understand you right, you say there is a larger volume of traffic
on comp.lang.ada compared to comp.lang.c or comp.lang.c++?

Not, at least, from my newsreader, not on an average day. c.l.a usually
has around 40-50 posts (Monday is more), and comp.lang.c++ has around
150 or so. Since last June I've seen 5 times more c.l.c++ posts compared
to c.l.a (25513 vs. 5099).

That said, I have noticed, in the last 6 months or so, and *definite*
increase in Ada postings, due in most part (MHO) to a higher interest
level in Ada95. It's new, it's standarized, there's a free compiler
(and it's not as frustrating to work in as some other languages;-).
I think it's proof positive that people are interested.

Another poster has noted the signal/noise - I think it's probably true
the noise in c.l.a is less, but we certainly do get off track
sometimes, n'est ce pas?

--
Richard G. Hash                                      email: rgh@shell.com
Shell Development Company, Bellaire Research Center  phone: (713) 245-7311
Member Team Ada                Free Ada95 compilers: cs.nyu.edu:/pub/gnat
Distributed, Full-OO, Multithreading, all built in. And it's free.

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Robert Dewar]

Actually there is a much more obvious reason why the number of messages
is not linear with use, and that has to do with general volume and
bandwidth. A newsgroup with much more than 150 messages a day gets
hard to follow, so fewer follow it, so the volume tends to be self
limiting.

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Mats Weber]

> 1.  The Ada language itself is so complex that no one can understand it
> without asking a lot of questions.
> 
> 2.  Ada people work on harder problems which require more consultation.
> 
> 3.  Usenet is getting only a fraction of the C and C++ questions -- the
> Compu$erve and Airheads Online forums handle most of their questions.
> 
> 4.  Ada people are lonely, and talk to each other to cheer one another
> up (ditto for comp.lang.lisp).

5. Ada gets the problems solved faster, which leaves some time for reading
the news.

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[Fergus Henderson]

hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) writes:

>I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
>relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  On many days the ratio is
>about 1:3, meaning 1 Ada message for every 3 C messages or every 4 C++
>messages.
[...]
>I can only speculate on the reasons for this:

5.  The traffic in a newsgroup is in general not a linear function of
    the number of people interested in the topic.  The higher the
    traffic, the more work is required to wade through it all, which
    discourages people.  In comp.lang.c++ people regularly complain
    that the newsgroup is too large and should be split.

-- 
Fergus Henderson - fjh@munta.cs.mu.oz.au
all [L] (programming_language(L), L \= "Mercury") => better("Mercury", L) ;-)

Re: How come so much traffic on comp.lang.ada??

[DEAN RUNZEL]

: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker) wrote:
: >
: > I've constantly been amazed by the volume of traffic on comp.lang.ada
: > relative to comp.lang.c and comp.lang.c++.  On many days the ratio is

: > 4.  Ada people are lonely, and talk to each other to cheer one another
: > up (ditto for comp.lang.lisp).
: > 

Actually,

1. Ada is only used by government employees, government contractors and
   university professors and we all know how much "free" time members of
   these groups have available to them.

This has to be #1 on the top ten list.

:-)

Dean R. Runzel