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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9e2776c05028676e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Why Ada is not the Commercial Lang of Choice Date: 1997/06/17 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 249143888 References: <33a1c14d.155787285@news.mhv.net> Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Paul says <<1. Ada is not and never was a programmer's language. It was never meant to be. It was imposed upon companies that the DOD contracts in an effort to create more reliable (i.e. bug free) products. They saw how much time and money was spent in fixing problems after a system was delivered and operational in the field. It is excessivly type-casted and cumbersome to use.>> This is of course complete nonsense. Many programmers find Ada a very comfortable language to program in. More significant is that to my taste, any programmer who finds Ada to be excessively strongly typed is just the sort of programmer I do ONT NOT want on any project I am involved in. I think in practice that a strong point of Ada is that it tends to filter out the hacking mentality that gives rise to such viewpoints. It is hard to quantify this effect, but it is definitely significant.