Re: The Future of Ada

[eberard@bse.com (Edward V. Berard)]

In article <1990Aug15.151935.8848@sctc.com>, endrizzi@sctc.com (Michael Endrizzi ) writes:
> 
> This is why the survival of Ada is at stake:
> 
> 	1)Control
> 	2)Cost
> 	3)Complexity
> 
> 1)Control: Programmers and our associated egos like to be in control 
> of our destinys. On paper, Ada is a powerful tool that automates
> many of the manual checks (recompilation, type checking) that
> other languages lack. By using this tool, we give up control.

This is an interesting observation. While I will admit that there
may be some things which are easier to accomplish in C (and, of
course, many things which are easier to accomplish in Ada), Ada
provides you with all the control that C offers you -- and, very
probably, much more. Just as an inexperienced C programmer might
believe that some things are impossible -- or incredibly difficult
-- in C, so would an inexperienced Ada programmmer think that
some things were "impossible" in Ada.

> And when that tool
> doesn't work right, it's like being in a speeding car with
> not steering wheel driving in the mountains.

I very much agree.
 
> C/Unix on the other hand is a hackers tool. If this don't
> work right...well we all know how easy it is to flip a
> few bits here and there to make it work.

As someone who uses both C and Ada, and knows quite a few
"C hackers," I think you are indulging in fantasy. I have
seen plenty of C programs which destroyed not only themselves,
but also their surrounding environment because the programmer
"flipped a few bits here and there." Incompetence is
programming language independent.
 
> 2)Cost: Quality Ada environments are expensive and resource hogs.
> You can't just sit at home and hack into the night on your
> Mac/PC. You must have your $100,000 Rational with 200 Gigs
> of storage parked in your basement to get a true Ada high.
> I know on our system, I must balance elegance with "will
> the damn thing even compile, fit on our disks, crowd out
> other users, etc".

Years ago I wrote an article about the problems with
validated Ada compilers. The average quality at the time (5 years
ago) was not all that great, but there were still some superstars.
Today, with over 50 vendors particpating, the quality has
improved noticeably.

	I _am_ at home at night programming (not "hacking") on my
	Mac with Ada, and using 2 different validated Ada compilers
	for the Mac OS. I am currently attempting to write code
	which deliberately breaks the Ada compilers I am using,
	and I am having nowhere near the problems you are having.
	(I might add that I am also _not_ using the same compiler
	vendor you are using.)

> C/Unix on the other hand is basically free. GCC is probably
> one of the highest quality C products and it is free. Unix
> comes standard on some systems.  Compile times, storage
> requirements are reasonable in a multi-user environment.

Please don't get sucked into the classic apples and oranges
comparison of C and Ada systems:

	1. If the most ardent Ada hater will grant that Ada
	   provides far more capabilities than does C. (In
	   fact, they often use this as an argument against
	   Ada.)

	2. C compiler vendors do not have to (re)validate their
	   compilers. Validation does cost.

	3. The marketplace for C compilers is greater than the
	   marketplace for Ada compilers. The size of the market
	   does indeed influence the cost of the product. (You,
	   of course, know that C is almost 10 years older than
	   Ada.)

 
> 3)Complexity: On paper Ada is addictive, elegant,  true
> solution to multi-person life-cycle software engineering.
> In reality, I know of only 2 products that are usable:
> 
> 	1) Rational
> 	2) DEC

As I said before, your experience is limited. I happen to
like both of the systems above, but others are at least
acceptable.

When I was teaching C, I used to have to assure some students
that all C compilers were not incredibly buggy, and that not
all C compilers generated huge object files. I explained to
them that there were many C compiler vendors, and that quality
varied widely. Even with a programming language which has
been around for nearly 2 decades, new vendors constantly
repeat the mistakes of the past.

> Unix was/is/will always be a disaster
> This then goes back to the cost issue.  

No comment.
 
				-- Ed


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edward V. Berard                                | Phone: (301) 353-9652
Berard Software Engineering, Inc.               | FAX:   (301) 353-9272
18620 Mateney Road                              | E-Mail: eberard@bse.com
Germantown, Maryland 20874                      | 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------