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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,be23df8e7e275d73 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-31 01:12:36 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!193.251.151.101!opentransit.net!wanadoo.fr!proxad.net!feeder2-1.proxad.net!nnrp4.proxad.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "nicolas" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <9jh2cs$aon$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net> <2sU67.1485$di7.4670499@nnrp3.proxad.net> <9jhb8u$g3s$1@s1.read.news.oleane.net> <3B5C4A92.647FC2EC@earthlink.net> <2bb77.5186$DL4.5097616@nnrp5.proxad.net> <3B5D5B79.F2DC527E@earthlink.net> <3B5DCE74.C12AA2D8@earthlink.net> <1Zu77.187$EF5.315498@nnrp1.proxad.net> <9jp5eo$e2b$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <9jrdl3$mh2$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <%hb87.917$%w2.3730577@nnrp3.proxad.net> <9jrt62$38t$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <3B619A6D.5DD6E782@home.com> <3B6636BA.96FD8348@home.com> Subject: Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 08:12:35 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.101.131.241 X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net X-Trace: nnrp4.proxad.net 996567155 195.101.131.241 (Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:12:35 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 10:12:35 CEST Organization: Guest of ProXad - France Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10839 Date: 2001-07-31T08:12:35+00:00 List-Id: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" a �crit dans le message news: 3B6636BA.96FD8348@home.com... > > I wouldn't see good and easy to use debuggers, standard libraries, GUI, IDE > > coming with the compiler, etc ... > > as tools going against safety concerns .... > > It's difficult for me to understand what the precise jist of your message > is here. One of the things you have meantioned here, suggest that you're > implying that YFL (your favourite language) provides a debugger, and so > that qualifies it to be just as safe as Ada. Am I reading too much into this? > Not at all, just saying that those tools don't go against safety, and so that safety cannot be an excuse for their absence. First note that we've been writing 99% of our code in Ada since around 1987, so we are not especially new to Ada, nor denying its qualities. I would also say that it is not a very good thing to have a "favourite language", because a good programmer should choose a language as a tool for a specific purpose, not for his personal feelings. It is nothing more than a tool. A very big problem of Ada, is that a lot of Ada users are so fan of it, that they deny obvious problems which prevent its wider use, and don't get fixed. The problem is more about IDE, GUI and libraries, I know there are excellent debuggers for Ada we use or have been using Alsys, Objectada, Apex, Verdix etc ... we tried GVD, which seems very promising, but still wondering how to display the value of a string variable (not always easy in -O0, almost impossible in -O1 or -O2 ...) This is an excellent example of amazing capabilities, and incredible elementary problems as well. To get back to the the original point, it was there is no integrated and frendly complete development kit for Ada, comparable to what any debutant find for popular languages. And unfortunately, a common Ada fan reaction to this is to give examples to show that Ada is safer than other languages. 1/ This is something every Ada user, and a lot of other people even if they are not using Ada, aknowledge, 2/ It has absolutely nothing to do with the question. The question could be - Ada has a lot of excellent qualities, but it is everything but popular. The lack of integrated environment and standard libraries coming with the compiler has certainly something to do with it. The answer was - Ada is safer ... Yes, I know it is safer, everybody knows, that's not the question, and if this is the only answer which can be given to someone thinking in using Ada, I think he'll wait for a real answer to his question. Even among Ada users I saw more than once this kind of situation : - Hey, there is a problem - No, there is no problem, you must be wrong - No there is a problem, here it is, how can I solve it ? - you must be doing it wrong ... (No answer to the problem ...) - Here is what, according to me, proves there is problem, but may be I missed something ... - Are you sure you really need to do that ? (change subject ...) - Yes I do, I think there is a problem and nobody gives a solution ... - Ada is much safer (So what ? we all know that ... nothing more about the problem ... end of the discussion ...)