Re: GCC conflict on Ubuntu for mixed Ada/C++ project

[zeta_no <olivier_henley@hotmail.com>]

suite...

sorry, my tab key, in the text, goes to the send button.  Bad design,
or setup.... Anyway.

- Backward: In the intro, clearly specify that Ada can easily replace
C/C++. (On various post, I often find C/C++ users contemptuous with
Ada.  Serve them their medicine)

iv. In the beginner section:

- Welcoming!
- Emphasis on what Ada has that others don't. Task, Real-Time etc.
Understandable explanation of the possibilities and reach.
- Recommend a particular online Ada class (I find this class/
tutorial : http://www.infres.enst.fr/~pautet/Ada95/a95list.htm very
good. Having source code that compiles well and illustrates all
lessons is very productive. It should be rewrite to use Ada2005 and
maybe a less verbose version for those who already have a programming
background)
 -Then offer all the other tutorials in a separate link.  This would
give the impression of cohesion in the offer of what you consider good
to learn from.
- Refers to books with proper summary and direct links. If legally it
can be done, direct links on amazon (look inside!).  Up to date, good
rated books.
- Collection of other tutorials. 3D, GTK, embedded projects etc. (fun
things!)
- Nice code projects. Ex: gather the code of this project (if the
author wants to open it): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkbuShAu8Ic
and make a companion document to go head first in the code, build the
project and have the reward of running it at home.  AdaCollision is
available right now.  Maybe something even simpler.
- Suggestion for implication in the community. Translation,
documentation, bindings etc.
- Official documentation ARM etc.

 v. In the normal user section:

- More advanced tutorial and code projects examples. (GPRbuild
tutorial, MarteOS exploration tutorials, GLOBE3D tutorials, SDL
tutorials, etc.)
- Official documentation and resources.
- A priority list of bindings, port, etc.
- Things can be redundant when it comes to link to resources and other
projects.  Some people might first think they are not beginners and
the other way around.

I have other ideas, but for now, I should stop writing emails and
start working on my Ada project AND a tutorial related to this work.

Stephen Leake wrote:

> Compared to what? What other open source language community is better
> organized?

Python appeared in 1991.  It has bindings and projects for almost
everything.  It is used everywhere on open source projects.  How much
you bet Python is much more popular than Ada?  How do you think they
actually achieved that?  I know it is not geared toward the same use,
but the phenomenon is there, to the point that many people try to use
it on segment of computer programming where it should not belong.  You
can even compile natively nowadays

> I don't read the C newsgroups, not the C++ newsgroups. Are you saying
> there is a lower percentage of newbies there having trouble with tools
> not working?

No, for sure newbies go through much more trouble with tools that do
not work in C/C++, but the situation there is different.  There is
much more pressure, everywhere, for a new programmer to learn and
master C/C++ that they will hardly account for loads of shortcomings.
Once they become good, they get use to flaws and behave like dealing
with those is normal.  Some even go further by propagating the idea
that fixing these issues is actually good as it defines once
competences of understanding the language and the program at hand.

Ada can't pretend to have the 'credentials' to force its newbie base
to such a level of resilience.

> Are we trying to attract serious programmers, or some other group of
> people? When I'm looking at new people for my team, I ask if they are
> comfortable with Emacs. If the answer is "tried it, didn't like it",
> they are not likely to make it on my team.

This sounds elitist.  I am ok with that, but force is to admit that
many people with a lot of potential fall in the hand of the C/C++
dragged by a rip current much more strong then the Ada promises.
There is very good programmers out there that stays on MS windows all
their life and don't even know about Emacs.

> That's a very high bar.
> I agree examples provided with tools should work. But examples of a good
> tool working "flawlessly" with a bad tool is not so desireable.

Ok, "flawlessly" was strong.  They should definitely work though.
Ludovic agreed too.

> And many, many more bad C tutorials. The web is not run by any
> organization; there is no way to "clean it up".

There is no way to "clean up" internet  but there is ways to enforce
good directions and produce quality material that contrast even with
the best C/C++ documents and projects.

Thanks again for your time and concern.

Olivier

p.s: I switched Linux again.  Debian "squeeze" is very neat and quite
orthodox in the admin policies.  I love it. Thanks for the good work.
Also, I'll check how I can help on Ada Programming (wikibooks) once
you confirm that most open source activity for Ada is going on there.