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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.182.111.228 with SMTP id il4mr22202081obb.39.1414849611672;
        Sat, 01 Nov 2014 06:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.19.43 with SMTP id 40mr1428qgg.13.1414849611555; Sat, 01
 Nov 2014 06:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!r10no2575150igi.0!news-out.google.com!u5ni17qab.1!nntp.google.com!u7no1663344qaz.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 06:46:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <m31iit$74m$1@dont-email.me>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com;
 posting-host=79.185.115.237;
 posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S
NNTP-Posting-Host: 79.185.115.237
References: <a510f410-56ea-46a6-9f3c-021a2389b936@googlegroups.com>
 <f4e05c1d-e52e-44f1-84e1-3814e526c469@googlegroups.com>
 <m2jvqm$qpc$2@dont-email.me>
 <dfa977d6-1458-4d8a-b226-15a759e321d6@googlegroups.com>
 <220f97ab-9aa2-4961-b140-2b271c3ab99a@googlegroups.com>
 <slrnm4ulto.nrc.lithiumcat@nat.rebma.instinctive.eu>
 <m2on9t$tv6$1@dont-email.me>
 <99759c3f-a35f-4745-a8fd-2fb6ab6fb1aa@googlegroups.com>
 <m2p0g5$4d0$1@dont-email.me>
 <48dc1630-8e7d-4e29-8bdd-53d74932d9d0@googlegroups.com>
 <m2pakq$99g$1@dont-email.me>
 <88a7f98c-55c2-4b5f-8a9d-c8b7512781c8@googlegroups.com>
 <m2ptm9$h8a$2@dont-email.me>
 <pgdzu6hi3mcu.kx0szqbevtow$.dlg@40tude.net> <m2r7k7$2m2$2@dont-email.me>
 <50cacb19-5d0b-4dbe-b91b-0b3b462913d6@googlegroups.com>
 <m2tnoi$j1q$4@speranza.aioe.org>
 <07d0ad94-160b-4873-ba1b-403e8c0bc420@googlegroups.com>
 <m2vlg9$onb$1@dont-email.me>
 <m31iit$74m$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a08f1eaf-2793-4e8b-a607-057416f2969f@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: C versus Ada (once again :-)), was: Re: F-22 ADA Programming
From: Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2014 13:46:51 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22959
Date: 2014-11-01T06:46:51-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> There's also the possibility that Ada may be a step too far for the
> average C programmer. Instead we should consider the possibility of
> a half-way language which is better (safer) than C but not as strict
> as Ada and would have ease of implementation/porting as one of it's
> goals.

This sentence sounds like a 100% description of C++.
Which also explains the difficulty of Ada in penetrating the business landscape that seems to be already covered and where people are more comfortable with gradual improvements (think Scala vs. Java) than with complete technology replacements.

In other words, C++ and Java do not leave any place for Ada to shine (even if, when given a chance, Ada would shine in every category).

-- 
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com