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=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,677963b1aa23e668 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!c8g2000vbv.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: What's stopping you from using Ada for your next commercial project? Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 05:49:30 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <4d78867e$0$23760$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <87r5afv0qa.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <4d78a96b$0$23753$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <4d78c3c6$0$23757$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <1wcgairebjd7m.1i237ckyxwpe5.dlg@40tude.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.3.40.82 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1299764971 6303 127.0.0.1 (10 Mar 2011 13:49:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:49:31 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: c8g2000vbv.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.3.40.82; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:19015 Date: 2011-03-10T05:49:30-08:00 List-Id: On 10 Mar, 13:58, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote: > It was 15(?) years before C++ templates became usable without issues, are > they now? Compare investments into C++ compilers with ones into Ada. But this has nothing to do with the original question. We are not 15 years ago and we don't care about somebody else's past investments (even if it sounds bad). We have 2011 today and a range of compilers to choose from. Some of them work, some of them don't. And there are new companies that start new projects. They don't care at all about the history of each particular toolchain - and frankly, they don't have to. This is the landscape. > > Or have I perhaps missed Maciej's original point? > > His point was that he has no issues with C++ compilers. That makes me > wonder what kind of projects he does, http://www.inspirel.com/products.html The SOCI and C++/Tcl libraries involve a good dose of metaprogramming, operator overloading and basically every single funny language feature. These projects were written for fun, so there was no limit for what to use. :-) The codebase contains only few workarounds for VC++ and none for g++, as far as I remember. In my experience the only problem that I had to face when porting from g++ to VC++ was related to the contents of standard header files - they tend to include each other in strange ways and differently on each platform. But certainly, after some brushing it is perfectly possible to compile even very complex code on both compilers. > because we have huge issues with the > compilers we are using (VC++, Borland C++, gcc). BC++ is crap. If you have to target it, you can expect problems and I can understand that the combination with the other two is problematic. But then - maybe it is again the matter of experience and ability to foresee problems before they come. I have been using C++ for multiplatform development for the last 10 years, so my perspective might be similar to the perspective of experienced Ada programmer who does not have problems with GNAT. :-) But then again, we are talking about new companies starting new projects. -- Maciej Sobczak http://www.inspirel.com/