Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability)

["nicolas" <n.brunot@cadwin.com>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2394 bytes --]

"Leif Roar Moldskred" <lrm@huldreheim.provida.no> a �crit dans le message
news: 5OPb7.4643$e%4.140738@news3.oke.nextra.no...
> nicolas <n.brunot@cadwin.com> wrote:
> Yes, but then neither does C or C++. I really think Java is the odd
> man out here, rather than Ada. (And I wouldn't be at all surprised if
> some of the 'standard libraries' for Java have problem with the ":"
> file separator on Macintosh, or similar glitches.)

There are problems. You have to deal at least with IE and Netscapes specific
things
No language is perfect. Otherwise why using Ada ?

> C and C++ certainly have a much wider selection of libraries, but how
> many of those can really be said to be cross-compiler, cross-platform?

The situation is not as dramatic as people think.
We've been using C commercial libraries for years without any bug or problem
for Windows, Linux, Sun, Irix

> Sure, you get some that can be used across a couple of different
> compilers, and a couple of different platforms - but in the context of
> _standard_ libraries, very few would really be wide-reaching enough to
> be valid.

In my personal opinion, Gnat/Objectada/Rational  Windows/Linux is a good
deal if not enough ...

> I've no first-hand experience, so this is an honest question and not
> rethoric, but how many Ada projects today have chosen Ada mainly
> because of software-reuse or portability reasons, as opposed to those
> who've chosen it mainly for other reasons?

Ours and some others we work or have been working with ...
Most Ada projects I know made Ada choice for software-reuse or portability
reasons, which are very important for easy maintenance.

> Hopefully, the open-source movements might alleviate the second reason
> some. If Ada software packages becomes easily available on the
> Internet, people might get into the habit of looking before
> leaping.

I completely agree, if they don't have to worry about compiler portability
when there is no reason to do so.
Due to the current situation of compiler vendors, open-source movements are
likely to be the only chance.

> Remember, languages like Java and Perl grew together with the wide
> spread of the Internet, and the large, easily available code-base that
> makes these languages so handy is probably a direct result of that.

I agree too. So portable libraries related to Internet (like XML for
example) wouldn't harm Ada promotion.