From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-07 18:36:43 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!west.cox.net!east.cox.net!cox.net!p01!lakeread01.POSTED!not-for-mail From: David Emery User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.4a) Gecko/20030401 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:36:42 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.98.140.119 X-Complaints-To: abuse@cox.net X-Trace: lakeread01 1062985002 68.98.140.119 (Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:36:42 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 21:36:42 EDT Organization: Cox Communications Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42255 Date: 2003-09-07T21:36:42-04:00 List-Id: Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote: > This is not a troll... but I am soliciting some opinion. > > 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 My take on this article is that much of the information in it is incorrect. The language preference for FCS is C++, not Java, although any JTA-Army approved language is OK (including Ada95). In many respects, the piece reads as a marketing piece for the RT Java efforts, applying a combination of truth (occasionally selective), FUD and wishful thinking about what RT Java -could be- versus what Ada -has already been.- But since few langauge decisions are made on facts, this article's absence of facts just goes with the flow... I'm firmly convinced that a big part of Java's perceived success or potential success in the real-time and safety critical area is more as a response to the disaster that is C++, than to any particular informed knowledge about Ada. Certainly, faced with the choice of (only) C++ and Java, I'd generally prefer Java. But if I have to do something that must really work, I'd prefer SPARK, Ada95, Ada83 and C (using one of the 'safe C' dialects). dave