Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada?

["Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca>]

"David Marceau" <davidmarceau@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:3F5AD703.24FC6D3E@sympatico.ca...
> "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" wrote:
> > I read a disturbing article in the July COTS Journal recently,
> > and thought I would bounce the controversial aspects off
> > of the group. The complete article can be read at:
> >
> >   http://www.cotsjournalonline.com/pdfs/2003/07/COTS07_softside.pdf
> > ...

> As it stands there are so many language wars going on that are
> pointless.  Currently there is a new wave of web site developers that
> are keen on using php/apache/sql on linux boxes....this sounds like a
> tangent but its not because eventually some of these developers might
> decide to build an embedded system with php in it.  It sounds a lot like
> when java started doesn't it?

The only "language war" that concerns me, is the one(s) connected
with Ada. Web development is itself, an interesting environment
to code for, so I won't go there in this article..

> I think the US DOD did a courageous thing to let other(non-ada)
> languages the chance to participate in building many projects.  From
> what I understand it was a calculated decision because they took metrics
> throughout these projects or at least they were supposed to.

On the hardware side, I might agree that the certification process
probably left them using less than leading edge stuff, though I
don't know enough about that side of things to say really.

On the software side (Ada), I am not so sure this was a smart thing.

The US military recognized a problem, and have basically "fixed it":
first with Ada83, and now the improved Ada95. Why toss their baby
away now?

> If Ada's time has come, then so be it...but the data from some other
> CROSSTALK issues point to other results...results that explicitly show
> Ada builds more reliable systems in the long term.   The other feeling
> driving me to use ada is my own personal experience with Ada, c,c++,
> java, javacard, and j2me.

I think most here who hang out/lurk in comp.lang.ada recognize
the strengths of Ada.

> I did read the real time java spec.  The only way it could really
> replace ada is if it inherited all of the ada language design.

So you say, but the article suggests that the spec and the intentions
are to help get away from Ada. It is the GOAL that bothers me. Not
whether or not they can do it.

When someone sets a GOAL, the idea generally is that they will
succeed at it someday. What bothers me about this article is
the "who" that is setting this goal.

> As you can see it's not black and white...it's just all gray.  I
> sincerely think ada and java will both be around with all their
> flavours.  I think DOD is not crazy enough to just ditch ada for java.

Define "crazy" ;-)

I don't know that culture very well, but from what I have read
and the impressions I get is that we have a new generation of
people who are thinking differently. It seems that they are
too young to remember the lessons of the past, and are blinded
by the dazzle of the "present".

Here's another example: They have done away with the requirement
to know and use Morse code in radio traffic. They are now more
comfortable with depending upon modern technology. Well, given
a weak signal, morse (CW) will get a message through when all
other forms of communication will fail. Furthermore, if you get
stranded somewhere, it is much easier to build a CW transmitter
and get a message out. You'll never build any other kind of
transmitter out of junk parts in the back woods.

Anyway, I find all of these trends rather disturbing.

> They know better than to put all there eggs in one basket which is what
> all the above is about right?

You are actually better off to put all your eggs in one basket,
if it is a good one. This is generally unwise when you're
investing because it is difficult to identify good investments.
But the success of Ada can be measured and it has been measured,
quite thoroughly.  Hardly an unknown quantity today.

> What DOD actually wants is to have more
> alternatives for doing reliable systems hence the place for
> RealTimeJava's existence and encouragement.

Well, I understand the "alternatives" argument, but I don't
see the "reliability" being in the other scenarios. The mindset
in the other languages just isn't there.

I like the comment that Wes made: "I'm glad I'm getting out
of software."  The current trends make me feel in a similar
vein. I mean who wants to look through reahms of Java code
and try to make sense of it? The new Java generic code looks
like C++ templates all over again. Yuck. Didn't anyone
learn anything from that mess?

> My suggestion if you want job security...know both Ada and Java very

I don't care about job security WRT software anymore, but I
do care about Ada and Open Source. I hate Microsoft because
I cannot write for that platform and expect my application to
still work a few years from now. Maybe things will settle
somewhat now that everything is moving to win32, but I
very much hated the churn that software went through on
that platform.

UNIX/Linux has been much stabler by comparison in that
respect. Ada95 as a language is stable also. I hate this
constant "churn" in software. I hate re-doing everything
every year. Did I say that I hated this? ;-)

Maybe I should be counting my years to retirement instead.

But will the medical equipment they hook me up to someday
be safe?  That thought scares me.

-- 
Warren W. Gay VE3WWG
http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg