Re: AdaMax? (was: ada to C++ translation)

[pontius@btv.MBI.com.invalid (Dale Pontius)]

In article <4519e058.0203060759.495623f6@posting.google.com>,
        dennison@telepath.com (Ted Dennison) writes:
> "Marin David Condic" <dont.bother.mcondic.auntie.spam@[acm.org> wrote in message news:<a63dgj$sn3$1@nh.pace.co.uk>...
>> O.K. but to stretch the analogy a little further. Look at regular, vs HDTV.
>> A content developer might like HDTV, but if the camera equipment, etc., is
>> too expensive (development environments) or the tools aren't available to
>
> No, that's a different analogy altogether. HDTV's problem isn't lack
> of openness, its just the normal ramp-up problem for any new
> technology. The end of this story has yet to be written. That fact
> alone makes attempts to draw analogies w/ programming languages
> unsatisfactory, as no real conclusion can be reached.
>
Actually, HDTVs problem is more in the standards area. It has taken
a long tim hammering a standard. Even with limited production and
broadcasting the MPAA wants to reopen it and add DRM, so it may be
that all of today's HDTVs will still become obsolete before wide
deployment.

At least Ada doesn't suffer from that problem - two very well defined
standards, 12 years apart.

I suspect Ada's biggest enemy is that C and C++ appear 'nearly good
enough'.

Dale Pontius
NOT speaking for IBM