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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,583275b6950bf4e6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,5f529c91be2ac930 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,59ec73856b699922 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-02 07:59:02 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!newsfeed.stueberl.de!newsr1.ipcore.viaginterkom.de!btnet-peer1!btnet-peer0!btnet-feed5!btnet!news.btopenworld.com!not-for-mail From: "Martin Dowie" Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.object,comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: the Ada mandate, and why it collapsed and died (was): 64 bit addressing and OOP Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 14:58:55 +0000 (UTC) Organization: BT Openworld Message-ID: References: <9fa75d42.0304300412.3c9f8157@posting.google.com> <98BC68183770643E.43B22CFE5F4D5EFD.5566989BE627964B@lp.airnews.net> <9fa75d42.0305010645.7a5572ed@posting.google.com> <3EB1C603.7788E194@adaworks.com> <9fa75d42.0305020520.20859901@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: host81-132-32-12.in-addr.btopenworld.com X-Trace: hercules.btinternet.com 1051887535 26957 81.132.32.12 (2 May 2003 14:58:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-complaints@lists.btinternet.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 2 May 2003 14:58:55 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.java.advocacy:63042 comp.object:62548 comp.lang.ada:36858 misc.misc:13898 Date: 2003-05-02T14:58:55+00:00 List-Id: "soft-eng" wrote in message news:9fa75d42.0305020520.20859901@posting.google.com... > > One more amateur teaching Ada with no experience using it on > > projects. There was so much of this going around that no one > > should be suprised that so many students came away from their > > Ada classes with a distorted view of the language. > > There weren't any Ada projects at that time to have experience in! However, there are projects now and plenty of people continuing to use it (and not just militery types either - networking, digital tv, financial services, etc). The language you are describing doesn't match very well with what my experiences (particularly *recent* experiences) have been. I've had experience of a couple of pretty awful Ada83 compilers and one good one but my experience of Ada95 compilers is that they are hugely improved and amoung the best compilers out there - in any language. Perhaps this isn't too surprising - a lot was being asked of the Ada83 compilers. Suddenly compiler writers were being asked to include a lot of the work of an OS (in particular tasks). The language itself has undergone one large increment from Ada83 -> Ada95. It sounds to me like you haven't seen or used much Ada95.