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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,103b407e8b68350b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-01-02 18:47:32 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn14feed!wn12feed!worldnet.att.net!207.217.77.102!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthlink.net!harp.news.atl.earthlink.net!not-for-mail From: "Marin David Condic" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Anybody in US using ADA ? New language competition? Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 21:47:12 -0500 Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Message-ID: References: <3E148004.5000408@cogeco.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: d1.56.b0.9b X-Server-Date: 3 Jan 2003 02:47:30 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:32469 Date: 2003-01-03T02:47:30+00:00 List-Id: Well, Ada's original requirements were targeted towards the embedded world and for a whole bunch of reasons, it went over like a lead balloon with the embedded developers. Partly because it initially didn't satisfy those requirements in practice. (Eventually, it got there but not after having created a horrible first impression and leaving a bad taste in the mouths of too many embedded developers.) I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the language and there isn't anything inherently wrong with its original requirements. However, if I was going to write a new set of requirements for Ada (or some new language) to meet, I'd spend some time talking to the folks who are not using Ada now and find out what they want most in a programming language. I'd bet (given the history of what is being bought out there) that development leverage would tip the scales in its favor. "Hey guys! Pay that initial investment in learning curve and infrastructure development up front and you'll be building apps in half the time you do now and oh, P.S., they'll be portable across Windoze, Unix, Linux and Mac too!!!" Reliability, performance, maintainability are all wonderful and desirable things - but first you've got to deliver! Ada's problem is that it has a history of promising how great its going to be one day, but doesn't deliver - at least not on time. By this, I mean that it has promised things like being good for embedded development and then taking years to get efficient enough to do it and not being targeted to nearly enough embedded platforms. People went with C because Ada just talked about how great it would be one day. Same story now for workstation/PC development. One day, if enough bindings and libraries are built you could develop better GUI apps that are more reliable. But so what? C++ and/or Java are already there with their libraries and bindings. Too bad that "One Day" Ada could do it better. People are picking their languages and platforms today - not "One Day". If Ada wants to win, its got to get out in front and lead the way with more/better leverage *today* rather than "One Day". MDC -- ====================================================================== Marin David Condic I work for: http://www.belcan.com/ My project is: http://www.jast.mil/ Send Replies To: m c o n d i c @ a c m . o r g "I'd trade it all for just a little more" -- Charles Montgomery Burns, [4F10] ====================================================================== Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote in message news:3E148004.5000408@cogeco.ca... > > It would be interesting reading to review the "competition to > the Green language" at this point in time, to see how the > other entries stack up with what we know and accept today in > compiler languages and technologies. Are there online documents > that describe the other entries? > > The Internet today would make it very easy for us to form our > own committee of "language experts" to start a language design > competition and review. Once the winner is announced, there must > be enough open sourced people spoiling for a chance to work on > a new language/compiler. Getting it accepted by industry would > be a different matter, but hey -- Linux is gaining acceptance. > Stranger things have happened. > > However, when I think about it myself, I just feel that Ada95 (and > pending 200y) has gained so much useful experience, that it seems > a shame to start over (and add to the competition with Ada). I'd > rather see Ada succeed than start from near scratch again. But hey- > maybe there is a better design waiting to be sprung on the world. > > -- > Warren W. Gay VE3WWG > http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg >