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=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, PP_MIME_FAKE_ASCII_TEXT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: 103376,be23df8e7e275d73 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-07 04:28:08 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!proxad.net!feeder2-1.proxad.net!nnrp4.proxad.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "nicolas" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <9kelv1$riq$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de> <5OPb7.4643$e%4.140738@news3.oke.nextra.no> Subject: Re: Proving Correctness (was Java Portability) X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 11:28:08 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.101.131.241 X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net X-Trace: nnrp4.proxad.net 997183688 195.101.131.241 (Tue, 07 Aug 2001 13:28:08 CEST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2001 13:28:08 CEST Organization: Guest of ProXad - France Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11484 Date: 2001-08-07T11:28:08+00:00 List-Id: "Leif Roar Moldskred" a �crit dans le message news: 5OPb7.4643$e%4.140738@news3.oke.nextra.no... > nicolas 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.